ABSTRACT
Objectives: To evaluate COVID-19 vaccines in primary prevention against infections and lessening the severity of illness following the most recent outbreak of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant in Shanghai. Method(s): To investigate whether inactivated vaccines were effective in protecting against COVID-19 infections, we estimated the odds ratio (OR) of the vaccination in COVID-19 cases vs. matched community-based healthy controls. To evaluate the potential benefits of vaccination in lowering the risk of symptomatic infection (vs. asymptomatic), we estimated the relative risk (RR) of symptomatic infections among diagnosed patients. We also applied the multivariate stepwise Logistic regression analyses to measure the risk of disease severity (symptomatic vs. asymptomatic and moderate/severe vs. mild) in COVID-19 patient cohort with vaccination status as an independent variable while controlling for potential confounding factors. Result(s): Out of the 153,544 COVID-19 patients included in the analysis, 118,124 (76.9%) patients had been vaccinated and 143,225(93.3%) were asymptomatic patients. Of the 10,319 symptomatic patients, 10,031(97.2%), 281(2.7%) and 7(0.1%) experienced mild, moderate, and severe infections, respectively. There is no evidence that the vaccination helped protect from infections (OR=0.82, p=0.613). The vaccination, however, offered a small but significant protection against symptomatic infections (RR=0.92, p < 0.001) and halved the risk of moderate/severe infections (OR=0.48, 95% CI: 0.37 - 0.61). Older age (> 60 years) and malignant tumors were significantly associated with moderate/severe infections. Gender also appeared to be a risk factor for symptomatic infections, with females being associated with a lower risk for moderate/severe illness. Conclusion(s): Inactivated COVID-19 vaccines helped provide a small but significant protection against symptomatic infections and halved risk of moderate/severe illness among symptomatic patients. The vaccination was not effective in blocking COVID-19 Omicron variant community spread.Copyright © 2023
ABSTRACT
Objectives: This study aimed to determine disease severity, clinical features, clinical outcome in hospitalized patients with the Omicron variant and evaluate the effectiveness of one-dose, two-dose, and three-dose inactivated vaccines in reducing viral loads, disease course, ICU admissions and severe diseases. Method(s): Retrospective cohort analysis was performed on 5,170 adult patients (>=18 years) identified as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 positive with Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction admitted at Shanghai Medical Center for Gerontology between March 2022 and June 2022. COVID-19 vaccination effectiveness was assessed using logistic regression models evaluating the association between the risk of vaccination and clinical outcomes, adjusting for confounders. Result(s): Among 5,170 enrolled patients, the median age was 53 years, and 2,861 (55.3%) were male. 71.0% were mild COVID-19 cases, and cough (1,137 [22.0%]), fever (592 [11.5%]), sore throat (510 [9.9%]), and fatigue (334 [6.5%]) were the most common symptoms on the patient's first admission. Ct values increased generally over time and 27.1% patients experienced a high viral load (Ct value< 20) during their stay. 105(2.0%) of these patients were transferred to the intensive care unit after admission. 97.1% patients were cured or showed an improvement in symptoms and 0.9% died in hospital. The median length of hospital stay was 8.7+/-4.5 days. In multivariate logistic analysis, booster vaccination can significantly reduce ICU admissions and decrease the severity of COVID-19 outcome when compared with less doses of vaccine (OR=0.75, 95%CI, 0.62-0.91, P<=0.005;OR=0.99, 95%CI, 0.99-1.00, p<0.001). Conclusion(s): In summary, the most of patients who contracted SARSCoV-2 omicron variant had mild clinical features and patients with vaccination took less time to lower viral loads. As the COVID-19 pandemic progressed, an older and less vaccinated population was associated with higher risk for ICU admission and severe disease.Copyright © 2023
ABSTRACT
Education plays a critical role in promoting preventive behaviours against the spread of pandemics. In Japan, handwashing education in primary schools was positively correlated with preventive behaviours against COVID-19 transmission for adults in 2020, during the early stages of COVID-19. The following year, the Tokyo Olympics were held in Japan, and a state of emergency was declared several times. Public perceptions of and risks associated with the pandemic changed drastically with the emergence of COVID-19 vaccines. We re-examined whether the effect of handwashing education on preventive behaviours persisted by covering a longer period of the COVID-19 pandemic than previous studies. A total of 26 surveys were conducted nearly once a month for 30 months from March 2020 (the early stage of COVID-19) to September 2022 in Japan. By corresponding with the same individuals across surveys, we comprehensively gathered data on preventive behaviours during this period. In addition, we asked about the handwashing education they had received in their primary school. We used the data to investigate how and to what degree school education is associated with pandemic-mitigating preventive behaviours. We found that handwashing education in primary school is positively associated with behaviours such as handwashing and mask wearing as a COVID-19 preventive measure but not related to staying at home. We observed a statistically significant difference in handwashing between adults who received childhood handwashing education and those who did not. This difference persisted throughout the study period. In comparison, the difference in mask wearing between the two groups was smaller but still statistically significant. Furthermore, there was no difference in staying at home between them. Childhood hygiene education has resulted in individuals engaging in handwashing and mask wearing to cope with COVID-19. Individuals can form sustainable development-related habits through childhood education.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: Shortly after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, SARS-CoV-2 virus was discovered in non-respiratory bodily fluids. This raised the potential of aerosolizing virus with insufflation. The aim of this study was to compare trends in surgical approach and indication at the start of the pandemic. Method(s): A retrospective cohort study was performed using the National Surgical Quality Improvement (NSQIP) Participant Use File and Targeted Colectomy databases to identify patients undergoing colon resections in 2020. Cohorts were divided by quarter of operation (Q1-Q4). The minimally invasive cohort included all cases using an insufflation-based approach. Primary outcomes included planned open operation. Multivariate analysis was used to assess confounders and effect modification on open operation. Result(s): Univariate analysis found the percentage of open colonic resections was greater in Q2 of 2020 with a subsequent return to pre-pandemic levels (38% Q2 vs 32%, 34%, and 33% for Q1, Q3, Q4 respectively;p< 0.001). There was a concordant increase in emergent surgeries (20% in Q2 vs 15% Q1), but multivariate analysis revealed having operation in Q2 independently increased the odds of having open operation (OR 1.11, p=0.004). Serious complication rate was highest in Q2 (17% vs 14%, 16%, 16% for Q1, Q3, Q4;p <0.001). Conclusion(s): There was an increase in the percentage of open colon resections in Q2 of 2020. Multivariate analysis found having operation in Q2 independently increased the odds of an open operation. The increase in planned open operation was potentially related to concern for SARS-CoV-2 becoming aerosolized in minimally invasive cases.
ABSTRACT
Objectives: Obesity is a global epidemic and leads to complications such as diabetes and dyslipidemia. The objective of this study was to examine the provision of diet, exercise, cholesterol and HbA1c testing in office based medical visits among normal, overweight, obese, and morbidly obese individuals in the US. Method(s): The 2018 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey data was used to conduct the study. Main outcome was provision of diet/nutrition, exercise, weight-reduction counseling, cholesterol and HbA1c testing in normal (BMI:18-25), overweight (BMI:25-30), obese (BMI:30 - 40), and morbidly obese (BMI:40+) individuals. A logistic regression model was fit to examine main outcomes by BMI status. Survey weights are assigned to the sample visits to obtain national estimates. All models were adjusted for confounders: race, ethnicity, age, gender, MSA, and insurance status. Odds ratios are reported to describe differences in overweight, obese, and morbidly obese patients compared to normal weight patients. Result(s): The weighted study sample consisted of 496,622,621 outpatient visits primarily white (84%), male (58%), covered by private insurance (57%). Multivariate analysis reveals that overweight, obese, and morbidly obese individuals received more HbA1c tests (OR, 1.02;CI, 1.01-1.03;OR, 3.47;CI, 2.31-5.2;OR, 9.01;CI, 4.88-16.66), and lipid profile tests (OR, 1.56;CI, 1.01-2.41;OR, 1.88;CI, 1.32-2.67;OR, 2.16;CI, 1.20-3.90) compared to normal weight patients. Similar trends were observed in the provision of diet/nutrition, exercise, and weight reduction counseling services (OR, 3.31;CI, 1.49 -7.35;OR, 7.51;CI, 2.85 -19.76;OR, 18.47;CI, 7.40- 46.10). Conclusion(s): Our study findings suggest that at risk individuals receive more weight-related services, such as testing for diabetes, cholesterol, diet, exercise, and weight reduction education compared to normal weight individuals. This study forms a baseline to examine disparity in provision of such services post-Covid (2019 and beyond) era given the disruption in the scarcity of health care professionals for such basic preventive services.Copyright © 2023
ABSTRACT
There is limited information on the effects of COVID-19 early in pregnancy on the risk of major congenital malformations (MCMs). Initial research has been limited by small samples, lack of attention to the timing of infection during pregnancy, lack of an appropriate control group, and biased selection of participants. The International Registry of Coronavirus Exposure in Pregnancy (IRCEP) was designed to estimate the relative risk of adverse perinatal outcomes among women with COVID-19 at specific times during gestation. Adult women were eligible to enroll if they had a SARS-CoV-2 test, regardless of the results, or clinically confirmed COVID-19 during pregnancy. Self-administered questionnaires collected data on the infection, pregnancy outcomes, and potential confounders. The analysis of MCMs included women with either a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test or a clinical diagnosis of COVID-19 during the first trimester (exposed group) or a negative SARS-CoV-2 test (reference) that enrolled while pregnant. Of 17,163 participants enrolled between June 2020 and July 2021, 1,727 had a SARS-CoV-2 infection during the first trimester and 10,235 had a negative test during pregnancy. Restriction to participants with complete follow-up reduced the sample size to 92 exposed and 292 unexposed reference pregnancies. MCMs were reported in three (3.3%) exposed and eight (2.7%) unexposed (RR 1.2;95% CI 0.32-4.2) newborns. No specific pattern of malformations was observed. The accumulated evidence is most compatible with no major teratogenic effects associated with maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection. Multiple biases need to be considered and addressed when estimating and interpreting the effects of COVID-19 early in pregnancy. The biggest methodological challenges for IRCEP were retention of participants enrolled in early pregnancy, and the potential bias introduced when participants enroll after pregnancy outcomes are known. Studies that allow enrollment after the outcome is known may select pregnancies with the outcome;those that exclude them would select survivors.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: During the Covid-19 pandemic, 540,895 people were identified as immunosuppressed and believed to be at increased risk of severe disease.1 As the pandemic evolved, biologic immunosuppression became a treatment of severe Covid-19.2 The true impact of immunosuppression on disease severity remains unclear. Objective(s): 1. Identify the incidence of immunosuppressed patients admitted to the ICU. 2. Analyse the mortality of those who are immunocompetent and immunosuppressed. 3. Examine the differences in mortality and level of care required between sub groups of patients on immunosuppression;those on biologics, non-biologics, and a combination of both. Method(s): A retrospective search of all Covid-19 positive admissions from March 2020 to November 2021 across two adult ICUs at Chelsea & Westminster NHS Trust was performed, using the EPR system. We identified those on immunosuppressive drugs, the level of care they required, and 28 day mortality. We categorised different types of immunosuppression, vaccination status, if applicable and co-morbidities. The exclusion criteria were primarily those with false positive swabs or incomplete data. Result(s): Baseline characteristics were median age (56 vs 56), and APCHE II score (20.08 in the immunosuppressed group vs 14.0 in immunocompetent). Thirteen immunosuppressed patients were identified. Reasons for drug immunosuppression in this group included solid organ transplant (6/13), and autoimmune conditions (7/13). Two patients were on biologic drugs alone, 8 were on non-biologics, and 3 were on a combination. Four of this group had received at least 2 doses of a Covid-19 vaccine. Mortality was 61.54% (8/13) in the immunosuppressed group vs 36.65% (199/543) in the immunocompetent group. Conclusion(s): Despite similar demographics, patients on immunosuppression had a significantly higher mortality than the immunocompetent group. Interestingly, those on targeted biological immunosuppression had the lowest incidence of requiring level 3 care, and no deaths. It is a possibility that biologics dampen the hyper-inflammation seen in severe Covid-19 pneumonitis, raising the question of a possible protective benefit from severe disease. This reflects the findings of the REMAP-CAP investigators,3 who showed that the IL-6 inhibiting biologics Tocilizumab and Sarilumab are efficacious against the most severe disease following admission to ICU with Covid-19 pneumonitis. The single centre and retrospective observational design, combined with small numbers on immunosuppression, despite a large inclusion criterion, mean it is not possible to make statistical conclusions. Confounding factors include the effects of vaccination, shielding and the change in SARS-CoV-2 variant prevalent during different times during the pandemic.
ABSTRACT
Background: External natural events, such as hurricanes, floods, and the COVID-19 pandemic can contribute to increased populational stress, especially for pregnant persons. Exposure to crises can produce short- and longterm health effects on pregnant persons and their offspring. There has been much interest in the association between maternal depression, anxiety, and stress during pregnancy and perinatal outcomes such as preterm birth (PTB) and low birth weight (LBW), before and since the COVID-19 pandemic, however results are controversial. Objective(s): Assess the association between prenatal mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic and preterm birth (delivery <37 weeks gestation) and low birthweight (<2,500 grams). Method(s): Pregnant individuals, >18 years, were recruited in Canada and provided data through a web-based questionnaire. We analyzed data on persons recruited between 06/2020-08/2021 who completed questionnaires while pregnant and two months post-partum. Data on maternal sociodemographics, comorbidities, medication use, mental health (Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale, General Anxiety Disorder-7, stress), pandemic hardship (CONCEPTION - Assessment of Stress from COVID-19), and on gestational age at delivery and birth weight, were selfreported. Crude and adjusted relative risks (aRR) with 95% confidence interval (95%CI) were calculated to quantify the association between PTB/LBW and maternal mental health. Result(s): A total of 1,265 and 1,233 participants were included in the analyses of PTB and LBW, respectively. No associations between PTB and prenatal mental health (depression [aRR 1.01, 95%CI 0.91-1.11], anxiety [aRR 1.04, 95%CI 0.93-1.17], stress [aRR 0.88, 95%CI 0.71-1.10], nor hardship [aRR 1.00, 95%CI 0.96-1.04]) after adjusting for potential confounders. The risk of PTB was increased with nonwhite ethnicity/race (aRR 3.85, 95%CI 1.35-11.00), consistently with the literature. Similar findings were observed for LBW (depression [aRR 1.03, 95%CI 0.96- 1.13], anxiety [aRR 1.05, 95%CI 0.95-1.17], COVID stress [aRR 0.92, 95%CI 0.77-1.09], or overall hardship [aRR 0.97, 95%CI 0.94-1.01]). Conclusion(s): No association was found between prenatal mental health nor hardship during the COVID-19 pandemic and the risk of PTB or LBW. However, it is imperative to continue the follow-up of mothers and their offspring to detect long-term health problems early.
ABSTRACT
Orthostatic intolerance (OI) is common in Long Covid. Physical counterpressure manoeuvres (PCM) may improve OI in other disorders. We characterised the blood pressure-rising effect of PCM using surface electromyography (sEMG) and investigated its association with fatigue in adults with Long Covid. Participants performed an active stand with beat-to-beat hemodynamic monitoring and sEMG of both thighs, including PCM at 3-minutes post-stand. Multivariable linear regression investigated the association between change in systolic blood pressure (SBP) and change in normalised root mean square (RMS) of sEMG amplitude, controlling for confounders including the Chalder Fatigue Scale (CFQ). In 90 participants (mean age 46), mean SBP rise with PCM was 13.7 (SD 9.0) mmHg. In regression, SBP change was significantly, directly associated with change in RMS sEMG ( 0.25 , 95% CI 0.07-0.43, P = 0.007);however, CFQ was not significant. PCM measured by sEMG augmented SBP without the influence of fatigue. Copyright © 2013 IEEE.
ABSTRACT
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic had a catastrophic impact worldwide, the significance of which continues to be explored. For EIP services the implications were two fold. First, that the pandemic and associated psychosocial stressors would lead to an increased incidence of psychosis and secondly, social distancing measures would negatively impact the detection and treatment of people with psychosis. 18 months on and we now have the data to explore these questions. Method(s): Participants included in this study are young people who attended one of the six headspace Early Psychosis (hEP) services across Australia and met the criteria for being at Ultra High Risk (UHR) of psychosis or experiencing a First Episode of Psychosis (FEP), were aged between 12 and 25 years, and provided informed consent for their data to be used. We will analyse the following routinely collected data from young people accessing EIP services and compared outcomes collected the year before the COVID-19 pandemic occurred (March 2019-February 2020) with data collected during the pandemic (March 2020 onwards): a. Clinical and functional outcomes of young people at UHR or with FEP, b. Duration of untreated psychosis (DUP), c. patterns of substance use, and d. source and rates of referrals. Results and Conclusion(s): I will present the differences in the above outcomes for those young people accessing treatment pre and during COVID-19 pandemic. Confounding factors such as age, gender, sexuality, ATSI status, CALD background will be controlled for. Discussion of the results ad implication for clinical practice will follow.
ABSTRACT
Background: Although over 100 million pregnant women worldwide are at risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2, little data exists on the impact of COVID-19 and related treatments on maternal/neonatal health. Objective(s): (1) To quantify the prevalence of medication use in pregnancy to treat COVID-19, and (2) To quantify and compare the risk of adverse pregnancy/neonatal outcomes in those with and without COVID-19. Method(s): In the Canadian Mother-Child population-based cohort (CAMCCO), two sub-cohorts were identified using prospective data collection of medical services, prescription drugs, hospitalization archives data, and COVID-19 surveillance testing program (02/28/2020- 2021). The first cohort included all pregnant women during the study period regardless of pregnancy status (delivery, induced/planned or spontaneous abortion);this cohort was further stratified on COVID-19 status. The second cohort included all nonpregnant women (aged 15-45) with a positive COVID-19 test. COVID-19 in pregnant or nonpregnant women was assessed using COVID-19 test results or ICD-10CM code U07.1 from hospital data. COVID-19 severity was categorized based on hospital admission. Women were considered exposed to COVID-19 medications if they filled at least one prescription for a medicine included in the WHO list in the 30 days pre- or 30 days post-COVID-19 positive test/diagnosis. Considering potential confounders, association between COVID-19 during pregnancy, treated vs not, and perinatal outcomes were quantified using log-binomial regression models. Result(s): 150,345 pregnant women (3,464 (2.3%) had COVID-19), and 112,073 nonpregnant women with COVID-19 diagnoses were included. Pregnant women with COVID-19 were more likely to have severe infections compared to nonpregnant women with COVID-19 (11.4% vs 1.6%, p<0.001). The most frequent medications used in pregnancy to treat COVID-19 were antibacterials (13.96%), psychoanaleptics (7.35%), and medicines for obstructive airway disease (3.20%). In pregnancy COVID-19 was associated with spontaneous abortions (adjRR 1.76, 95%CI 1.37, 2.25), gestational diabetes (adjRR 1.52, 95%CI 1.18, 1.97), prematurity (adjRR 1.30, 95%CI 1.01, 1.67), NICU admissions (adjRR 1.32, 95%CI 1.10, 1.59);COVID-19 severity was increasing these risks but exposures to COVID-19 medications reduced all risks. Conclusion(s): COVID-19 severity was higher in pregnancy. Antibacterials, psychoanaleptics, and medicines for obstructive airway disease were the most used overall. COVID-19 was associated with adverse outcomes for mothers and newborns.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on pregnant persons' mental health. Prepandemic data reports an impact of depression, anxiety, and stress on the emotional and behavioral development of the child. Objective(s): We aimed to evaluate the impact of gestational maternal depression, anxiety, and stress during the COVID-19 pandemic on the child's cognitive development at 18 months. Method(s): The CONCEPTION study is a prospective mother-child cohort, established since June 23, 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic. Depression and anxiety were assessed during pregnancy using validated tools in French and English (Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale [EPDS] and General Anxiety Disorder-7 [GAD-7]) as well as stress and antidepressant consumption. The child's cognitive development was reported by the mother using the third edition of Ages and stages questionnaires (ASQ-3) at 18 months of age. Data on other covariates were collected electronically. Multivariate linear regression models were built to assess the association between prenatal maternal depression, anxiety, stress, and child development across domains: communication, gross motor, fine motor, problem solving, and personal-social domains while adjusting for covariates. In addition, sensitivity analyses have been added like COVID-19 diagnosis. Result(s): Overall, 445 mother-child dyads were included in analyses (mean gestational age at delivery 39.2 weeks +/-1.8). Mean gestational scores were, for depression (EDPS, 7.8+/-5.4), anxiety (GAD-7, 4.4+/-4.0), and stress (4.3+/-2.1). Adjusting for potential confounders, as well as for maternal depression and anxiety during pregnancy, maternal prenatal stress was associated with communication skills (adjusted beta = 1.5, CI 95 % (0.34, 2.7)) and fine motor skills (adjusted beta = 1.06, CI 95 % (0.02, 2.6)) at 18 months age. Gestational depression, anxiety, and antidepressants use were not associated with any of the ASQ-3's domains. In addition, no significant association was found in stratified analysis for COVID-19 diagnosis. Conclusion(s): During the COVID-19 pandemic, gestational maternal stress was associated with some aspects of childhood cognitive problems, including communication and fine motor skills. Our results highlight the need to continue following-up on children until kindergarten to better understand the impact of maternal mental health during pregnancy on the child's cognitive development in the era of COVID-19.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: Multiple meta-analyses have shown that over 15% patients with COVID-19 have at least one gastrointestinal complaint, most commonly diarrhea. The effects on the gastrointestinal system are thought to be mediated by the high expression of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and cellular serine proteases (TMPRSS2) in enterocytes, which cause altered intestinal permeability. The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence of diarrhea as it relates to COVID-19 infection and to determine if having concomitant diarrhea had a significant impact on disease course. Method(s): A retrospective chart review of 164,730 patients in a hospital system who were older than 18 years of age and had a positive SARS-CoV-2 test from March 2020 to February 2022 was completed. Diarrhea was determined using ICD code or patient's symptoms. Patients with confounding variables such as IBD, IBS, Celiac, Clostridium difficile, and pancreatic insufficiency were excluded. Demographic clinical characteristics and outcomes, including inpatient admission and mortality, were compared in patients with and without diarrhea. The Mann-Whitney test and Fisher's exact or Chi-square test was used for continuous and categorical variables respectively and multivariate logistic regression was used to evaluate for significant differences in disease outcome between the two groups. (Table) Results: Of the 164,730 patients included, 14,648 (8.89%) had diarrhea at the time of SARS-CoV-2. 6,748/33,464 (20.16%) of inpatient admissions were associated with diarrhea. On multivariate analysis, diarrhea was an independent risk factor for inpatient hospitalization (OR 2.39, CI 95% 2.28-2.51, P, 0.001) and inpatient mortality (OR 1.15, CI 96% 1.06-1.26, P= 0.001) after controlling for age, gender, race, comorbidities that could impact patient outcome, use of immunomodulators and outpatient antibiotics. Conclusion(s): These findings show that, even with controlling for comorbidities with COVID-19, diarrhea was an independent factor for predicting inpatient mortality and inpatient admission in general. Patients who had diarrhea and COVID-19 were sicker, having more comorbid conditions than those without diarrhea in our cohort. Attention should be given to not only respiratory complaints of COVID-19, but also gastrointestinal complaints, as they are an indicator of poor prognosis and mortality.
ABSTRACT
Background: As of December 2022, SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus resulted in over 6 million deaths worldwide.[1] It was realized early into the pandemic, that COVID-19 significantly impacts the Cardiovascular system. [2] Patients with pre-existing cardiovascular comorbidities were particularly at higher risk of adverse outcomes during their hospitalizations. [3] Similarly, it can be safe to assume patients with adult congenital heart disease (ACHD) should considered a high-risk population for the development of severe COVID infection with increased rates of significant cardiovascular complications. Objective(s): Based on this reasoning and the paucity of data available on this topic using a large database, we sought to investigate the outcomes of patients with ACHD who were admitted to the hospital with COVID-19. Method(s): The National Inpatient Sample database for 2020 was queried to identify adult hospitalizations with a primary diagnosis of COVID-19 and a secondary diagnosis of ACHD using International Classification of Diseases - 10 Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) codes. The primary outcome studied was inpatient mortality, while secondary outcomes included inpatient complications, mean length of stay (LOS), and total hospital charge (THC). Multivariate logistic and linear regression analyses were used to adjust for possible confounders and analyze the variables. Result(s): Out of 1,050,045 COVID-19 hospitalizations registered, 2,425 (0.23%) had ACHD as a secondary diagnosis. Encounters with ACHD who were hospitalized with COVID-19 had significantly higher adjusted odds of inpatient mortality (Adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR]: 1.4, [95% CI: 1.05-1.88], p=0.022), Longer LOS (Mean 2.4 days, [95% CI: 1.35-3.40], p <0.001), and higher Total Hospital Charges (Mean $53,000, [95% CI: 20811-85190], p <0.001). A Forrest plot (Figure 1) demonstrates a graphical representation of the multivariate analysis of the significant in-hospital complications when adjusted for patient demographics, comorbidities, and hospital characteristics. Conclusion(s): Among COVID-19 hospitalizations, those with a history of congenital heart diseases had significantly worse outcomes in terms of in-hospital mortality, sepsis;the need for endotracheal intubation, mechanical ventilation, and vasopressors;developing acute kidney injury and pulmonary embolism, in addition to the longer length of stay, and higher total hospital charges. [Formula presented]Copyright © 2023
ABSTRACT
Introduction: In the US there has been a recent outbreak of adenovirus hepatitis in the pediatric population. However, to our knowledge, there has been only one reported case of adenovirus hepatitis in an immunocompetent adult. We have identified another such case. Case Description/Methods: A 25 year old female with no medical history presented with abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and subjective fevers for two weeks and was found to have transaminitis 25-30x the upper limit of normal, which were: AST 791, ALT 542, ALP 92, and total bilirubin of 2.9. The patient reported no prior history of liver disease. She denied alcohol, tobacco, illicit drugs, or herbal medications, but did report taking acetaminophen 1500 mg daily for two weeks. Serum acetaminophen levels were normal and serum and urine toxicology were negative. US with doppler was unremarkable, CT showed cholelithiasis, MRCP showed a normal common bile duct without obstructive calculus. Autoimmune causes of hepatitis, ceruloplasmin and alpha-1 antitrypsin were all unremarkable. HAV, HBV, HCV, HDV, HEV, CMV, HSV, VZV, EBV, HIV, and COVID19 were all negative. Ultimately, the serology for adenovirus was positive. After a week of supportive treatment, the patient's labs trended down and symptoms resolved. Discussion(s): Adenovirus is confirmed by a rise in antibody titer or by virus detection. Coagulative necrosis in histopathology is a finding in liver biopsies if they are pursued in unexplained cases of liver injury. Ultimately, adenovirus hepatitis can be diagnosed once all common causes of hepatitis have been excluded. In the current outbreak, only children have been getting adenovirus hepatitis. In adults, a high prevalence of neutralizing antibodies contributes to immunity, and therefore only in immunocompromised states, do adults get such an infection. Supportive care with IV fluids, electrolyte correction, and antiemetics usually is enough with eventual symptomatic and laboratory improvement as it was for our patient. Studies have shown that extensive disease can be treated with antiviral drugs, cidofovir, and ribavirin. Our patient's history of acetaminophen use is a confounder, however, her normal serum level and her symptoms suggestive of an infectious cause made acetaminophen less of a culprit. We hypothesize that our patient's use of acetaminophen when she was initially exposed to the virus is what made her susceptible to developing adenovirus hepatitis and we hope this case adds insight for clinicians dealing with future adult cases.
ABSTRACT
Intro: SARS-CoV-2 infection primarily affects the respiratory system. However, other organ systems may also be involved, leading to acute and chronic sequelae. Among other post-acute sequelae, incident diabetes is also being assessed but population-based evidence is still sparse. We evaluated the association between COVID-19 infection including severity of infection and diabetes incidence using population-based registries and datasets. Method(s): We conducted a population-based matched retrospective cohort study using data from the BC COVID-19 Cohort. The exposure was SARS-CoV-2 infection, and the primary outcome was incident diabetes identified >30 days after the specimen collection-date for COVID-19 test. We performed multivariable Cox proportional hazard modeling to assess the effect of COVID-19 infection and disease severity on diabetes. Stratified analyses were performed to evaluate the effect modification of SARS-CoV-2 infection on diabetes risk. Finally, we computed, the confounder-adjusted population attributable fraction from the Cox models Findings: During the median follow-up of 257 days, 608 (0.5%) events were observed among exposed and 1,864 (0.4%) among unexposed. Incident-diabetes rate/100,000 person-years was significantly higher among the exposed group vs. unexposed group (672.2 vs 508.7 respectively). The risk of incident diabetes was higher among those with COVID-19 infection (HR=1.16, 95% CI:1.06-1.28), and among males (aHR=1.22, 95%CI:1.06-1.40). The risk of diabetes was much higher among people with more severe disease (HRICU=3.32, 95%CI:1.99 - 5.54;HRhospitalized=1.97, 95%CI:1.33 - 2.93). Conclusion(s): SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with higher risk of diabetes overall and among males. Severe SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with higher risk of diabetes among both males and females. Furthermore, infection with SARS-CoV-2 could contribute to 3-5% increase in burden of diabetes, which will result in substantial number of diabetes cases with impact on healthcare needs for management of diabetes and its complications in addition to health of affected population.Copyright © 2023
ABSTRACT
Background: Aim of the study was to analyze neutralizing activity against BA.5,BQ.1.1 and T cell response after 3rd booster dose [3BD (5th shot)] with BA.4/5 bivalent vaccine by hybrid immunity (HI) and CD4 count in advanced PLWH. Method(s): In PLWH with previous AIDS and/or CD4< 200/mm3 receiving 3BD (original strain/BA.4/5),immunogenicity was assessed at time of 3BD (T0) and at day 15 (T1) by microneutralization assay [MNA90] against Omicron BA.5, BQ.1.1 and by IFNgamma-ELISA. PLWH were stratified by HI vs. nHI and by CD4 count at T0 ( >or< 500/3). For crude mean comparisons, neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) were expressed in natural scale and fold changes, IFNgamma and all values for regression analyses in log2 scale, paired t-test used to test changes over T0-T1. Two 2-arms parallel trials were emulated: HI and CD4 count as exposure, log2 nAbs and IFNgamma as outcome. Average treatment effect (ATE) of the two exposures were estimated by marginal models weighted for potential confounders (age, CD4 nadir, years from AIDS;when HI was the exposure also CD4 count). Result(s): N=48 PLWH on ART, 15% female, median age 56 yrs, 45% >1 comorbidity, 87% with previous AIDS, median CD4 nadir 44 cell/mm3 (16-102), 98% with HIV-RNA < 50 cps/mL. A significant increase of nAbs against BA.5 (fold-increase 8.8,p< 0.0001) and BQ.1.1 (6.4, p< 0.0001) was observed from T0 to T1. At T1, in nHI (n=29), mean nAb was 176 and 53 against BA.5 and BQ.1.1, respectively, with a fold change reduction (FCR) vs BA.5 of 3.3;in HI (n=19), 496 and 128, respectively, with a FCR of 3.8 (Fig.1A). After controlling for confounders, HI was associated with a higher level of neutralizing response against BA.5 [ATE=1.17 log2 (95%CI 0.34;2.00), P=0.006] but not against BQ.1.1 [0.65 log2 (-0.18;1.48), p=0.124]. At T1, among PLWH with CD4 count< 500 (n=29), mean nAb was 290.8 and 83.9 against BA.5 and BQ.1.1, respectively, with a FCR of 3.4;in those with CD4 count >500 (n=19), 230.4 and 64.3, respectively, with a FCR of 3.6 (Fig. 1C).There was no impact of CD4 count on neutralization after controlling for potential confounding factors. No evidence for a difference between T0 and T1 was detected for IFNg (Fig.1B,D). Conclusion(s): In PLWH with advanced diseases, bivalent BA.5 3BD elicited strong neutralization against BA.5, and retained cross-neutralization against BQ.1.1, even if 3 times lower. HI but not CD4 count >500 appeared to enhance neutralization against BA.5. Importantly, bivalent vaccine appeared to have no effect on T-cell mediated response. (Figure Presented).
ABSTRACT
Objective: One of the potentially fatal consequences for diabetic patients is diabetic ketoacidosis acidosis (DKA), which is also linked to poor hospital outcomes. There is no much information in literature about COVID-19 and how it relates to other hospitalizations. The impact of COVID-19 on in-hospital mortality and other clinically relevant outcomes for DKA patients is being investigated for the first time in this study. Method(s): Patients admitted with a primary diagnosis of DKA with or without a subsequent diagnosis of COVID-19 Infection were found in the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) Database 2020. Patients were divided into two groups: those who have COVID-19 and those who don't. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were utilized to account for frequent confounders and assess the risk of mortality and in-hospital outcomes between the two groups. Result(s): The total of 110,130 DKA admissions were identified between Jan and Dec 2020. COVID-19 Infection was diagnosed in 2,504 patients (2.2%). The average age of the cohort sample was 35 years old, 51% were male, and 60% were white. The average length of stay (LOS) was 3 days, and the average total hospital charges were 33,132 US dollars. The total number of patients who died was 225 patients. When the two groups were compared, COVID-19 Infection was associated with an increased risk of in-hospital mortality among DKA patients (OR 5.3, 95% CI 1.7-15.9, p=0.003). COVID-19 patients had a higher risk of acute respiratory failure (OR 2.9, 95% CI 1.7-3.9, p< 0.001) and septic shock (OR 3.9, 95% CI 1.5-9.8, p=0.003). There was no significant difference between the COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 groups in the risk of acute coronary syndrome (OR 1.2, 95% CI 0.49-3, p=0.66), cardiac arrest (OR 2, 95% CI 0.5-7.9, p=0.31), hypokalemia (OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.92-1.4, p=0.214), deep vein thrombosis (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.14-2.4, p=0.47), or pulmonary embolism (OR 3.6, 95% CI 0.84 - 15.4, p=0.083). COVID-19 patients had a longer mean LOS (4.2 vs 2.9 days, p< 0.001) and higher mean total hospital charges (41,216 vs 32,973 $, p=0.004). Discussion/Conclusion: Patients admitted with DKA and concomitant COVID-19 infection found to have a higher risk of in-hospital mortality and worse hospital outcomes, particularly acute respiratory failure and septic shock. In comparison to non-COVID patients, COVID-19 patients have a longer mean LOS and a higher mean of total hospital charges.Copyright © 2023
ABSTRACT
Background: Asymptomatic Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection reshapes systemic immune responses and its replication can be both a consequence and cause of inflammation. As CMV resides in the same tissues affected by SARSCoV- 2, we hypothesized that asymptomatic CMV co-infection might modify the pathogenesis of both acute and post-acute COVID-19. Method(s): Participants had current or prior nucleic acid-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in the COVID-19 Multi-Phenotyping for Effective Therapies (COMET, n=219), Immunophenotyping Assessment in a COVID-19 Cohort (IMPACC, n=244) or the Long-term Impact of Infection with Novel Coronavirus (LIINC, n=327) cohorts. We assessed the relationship between CMV serostatus and odds of hospitalization and plasma SARS-CoV-2 N antigen levels during acute COVID-19 as well as post-acute "Long COVID" symptoms, defined as >=1 of 32 COVID-19-attributed symptoms present at least 60 days following initial symptom onset. Result(s): Among 758 participants, 518 were hospitalized for their acute COVID-19 episode. CMV seropositivity was independently associated with a 1.9-fold increased odds of hospitalization for acute COVID-19, after adjustment for age, sex, race, ethnicity, HIV status, prior autoimmune disease, diabetes, and obesity (p=0.01, A). Among those hospitalized, CMV seropositivity was also associated with higher plasma SARS-CoV-2 N antigen levels (median 936 vs. 323 pg/ml, P=0.03, B), which remained significant after adjustment for potential confounders, but not with ICU admission (n=209), death (n=58), or thrombotic events (n=31). In contrast to its relationship to acute COVID-19 disease severity, CMV seropositivity was independently associated with a 48% decreased odds of having neurocognitive Long COVID symptoms such has headache and brain fog 4 months after initial COVID-19 diagnosis (P=0.036). Conversely, serologic evidence of Epstein-Barr Virus (EBV) reactivation and HIV both increased the odds of these symptoms (C). Conclusion(s): CMV seropositivity is associated with a 1.9-fold higher odds of hospitalization in people with acute COVID-19 and a nearly 3-fold higher SARS-CoV-2 antigen burden in hospitalized patients. In contrast, CMV seropositivity is associated with a decreased odds of neurocognitive Long COVID symptoms, while other chronic viral co-infections like EBV reactivation and HIV are associated with an increased odds of this complication. The biologic mechanisms mediating these relationships are unknown, but warrant further investigation. (Figure Presented).
ABSTRACT
Background: Early treatment for preventing severe outcome of COVID-19 in high-risk not-hospitalized patients (pts) by monoclonal antibodies or antivirals represented a high-priority approach. Real-world evidence (RWE) from observational studies could give information on clinical effectiveness and predictors of treatment failure. Method(s): Single-center observational study on SARS-CoV-2 pts, not requiring hospital admission but having high-risk of severe outcome from COVID-19. All were selected for early treatment with monoclonal antibodies or antivirals from March 2021 to November 2022. Participants were classified according to whether they were hospitalized due to severe COVID-19 or died by day 30 from starting treatment in the outpatient setting (baseline). We conducted a logistic regression analysis with this binary endpoint and 4 main exposures of interest measured at baseline: i) age ( >75 years old) ii) vaccination status iii) VoC, and iv) immunosuppression or having received immunosuppressive therapy. We built a separate model for each of these exposures, which included a specific set of potential confounders. Result(s): 3,491 pts, female 48.6%, median age 67 yrs (IQR 55-77), fully vaccinated 83.7%;previous infection 4.6%;CVD 52.2%;cancer 24.6%;immunodeficiency 40.6%. Prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 VoC: delta 8.7%, BA.1 16.9%, BA.2 6.8%, BA.4/5 12.2, BQ 0.1%, other 3.0% (Tab.1A). Treatment exposure was BAM/ETE 569 (16.5%), CAS/IMD 262 (7.6%), SOT 935 (27.1%), TIX/CIL 79 (2.3%), NMV/r 555 (16.1%), MLP 684 (19.8%), RDV 356 (10.3%). Primary endpoint occurred in 80/3,491 pts with a day-30 incident risk of 2.3% (95%CI 1.8-2.9). Tab.1B shows the unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios (OR) of hospitalization due to COVID-19 or death by day 30. After controlling for potential confounders, higher risk was observed for the unvaccinated (OR 1.95;95%CI 1.03-3.71) and for those affected by immunodeficiency [1.73;1.04-2.89). Having delta as reference variant, an increased risk was observed for BA.2 [2.08;1.00-2.34]. No evidence for a difference was seen by age or other comorbidities. Conclusion(s): In this RWE study, largely represented by vaccinated people and prevalently observed in the Omicron era, the estimated risk of clinical failure of early treatment was slightly higher than that recorded in the experimental arms of randomized studies. The analysis confirms that among those eligible for early treatment, the unvaccinated and those with severe immunodeficiency are at higher risk of developing severe COVID-19. Table 1 -A. Main characteristics of 3,491 not-hospitalized people with mildto-moderate COVID-19 at high risk of severe disease observed between March 2021 to November 2022 according to reaching (n=80) or not reaching (3,411) primary clinical endpoint. B. Odds ratios (OR) of having a COVID-19-related hospitalization or death by different exposure factors.