Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 17 de 17
Filter
1.
J Clin Gastroenterol ; 56(1): e38-e46, 2022 01 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1605073

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The authors investigated the incidence, risk factors, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGB) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), who were attending the emergency department (ED), before hospitalization. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all COVID-19 patients diagnosed with UGB in 62 Spanish EDs (20% of Spanish EDs, case group) during the first 2 months of the COVID-19 outbreak. We formed 2 control groups: COVID-19 patients without UGB (control group A) and non-COVID-19 patients with UGB (control group B). Fifty-three independent variables and 4 outcomes were compared between cases and controls. RESULTS: We identified 83 UGB in 74,814 patients with COVID-19 who were attending EDs (1.11%, 95% CI=0.88-1.38). This incidence was lower compared with non-COVID-19 patients [2474/1,388,879, 1.78%, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.71-1.85; odds ratio (OR)=0.62; 95% CI=0.50-0.77]. Clinical characteristics associated with a higher risk of COVID-19 patients presenting with UGB were abdominal pain, vomiting, hematemesis, dyspnea, expectoration, melena, fever, cough, chest pain, and dysgeusia. Compared with non-COVID-19 patients with UGB, COVID-19 patients with UGB more frequently had fever, cough, expectoration, dyspnea, abdominal pain, diarrhea, interstitial lung infiltrates, and ground-glass lung opacities. They underwent fewer endoscopies in the ED (although diagnoses did not differ between cases and control group B) and less endoscopic treatment. After adjustment for age and sex, cases showed a higher in-hospital all-cause mortality than control group B (OR=2.05, 95% CI=1.09-3.86) but not control group A (OR=1.14, 95% CI=0.59-2.19) patients. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of UGB in COVID-19 patients attending EDs was lower compared with non-COVID-19 patients. Digestive symptoms predominated over respiratory symptoms, and COVID-19 patients with UGB underwent fewer gastroscopies and endoscopic treatments than the general population with UGB. In-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients with UGB was increased compared with non-COVID patients with UGB, but not compared with the remaining COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/diagnosis , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/epidemiology , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology , Gastroscopy , Humans , Incidence , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2
2.
United European Gastroenterol J ; 9(9): 1081-1090, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1469560

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients are at increased risk for thromboembolic events. It is unclear whether the risk for gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is also increased. METHODS: We considered 4128 COVID-19 patients enrolled in the Lean European Open Survey on SARS-CoV-2 (LEOSS) registry. The association between occurrence of GI bleeding and comorbidities as well as medication were examined. In addition, 1216 patients from COKA registry were analyzed focusing on endoscopy diagnostic findings. RESULTS: A cumulative number of 97 patients (1.8%) with GI bleeding were identified in the LEOSS registry and COKA registry. Of 4128 patients from the LEOSS registry, 66 patients (1.6%) had a GI bleeding. The rate of GI bleeding in patients with intensive care unit (ICU) admission was 4.5%. The use of therapeutic dose of anticoagulants showed a significant association with the increased incidence of bleeding in the critical phase of disease. The Charlson comorbidity index and the COVID-19 severity index were significantly higher in the group of patients with GI bleeding than in the group of patients without GI bleeding (5.83 (SD = 2.93) vs. 3.66 (SD = 3.06), p < 0.01 and 3.26 (SD = 1.69) vs. 2.33 (SD = 1.53), p < 0.01, respectively). In the COKA registry 31 patients (2.5%) developed a GI bleeding. Of these, the source of bleeding was identified in upper GI tract in 21 patients (67.7%) with ulcer as the most frequent bleeding source (25.8%, n = 8) followed by gastroesophageal reflux (16.1%, n = 5). In three patients (9.7%) GI bleeding source was located in lower GI tract caused mainly by diverticular bleeding (6.5%, n = 2). In seven patients (22.6%) the bleeding localization remained unknown. CONCLUSION: Consistent with previous research, comorbidities and disease severity correlate with the incidence of GI bleeding. Also, therapeutic anticoagulation seems to be associated with a higher risk of GI bleeding. Overall, the risk of GI bleeding seems not to be increased in COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/epidemiology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Anticoagulants/adverse effects , Child , Child, Preschool , Comorbidity , Critical Illness , Diverticular Diseases/diagnosis , Europe/epidemiology , Female , Gastroesophageal Reflux/complications , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology , Hospitalization , Humans , Infant , Intensive Care Units , Male , Middle Aged , Peptic Ulcer/diagnosis , Registries , Severity of Illness Index , Young Adult
3.
Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol ; 2021: 2534975, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1405234

ABSTRACT

The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been reported to affect the gastrointestinal system with a variety of symptoms, including bleeding. The prevalence of bleeding in these patients remains unclear. The aim of this meta-analysis is to estimate the rate of gastrointestinal bleeding in COVID-19 patients and its association with mortality. MEDLINE and Embase were searched through December 20, 2020. Studies reporting COVID-19 patients with and without gastrointestinal bleeding were included. Estimated prevalence with 95% confidence intervals (CI) was pooled; heterogeneity was expressed as I 2. Metaregression analysis was performed to assess the impact of confounding covariates. Ten studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. A total of 91887 COVID-19 patients were considered, of whom 534 reported gastrointestinal bleeding (0.6%) [409 (76.6%) upper and 121 (22.7%) lower gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB and LGIB, resp.)]. The overall pooled gastrointestinal bleeding rate was 5% [95% CI 2-8], with high heterogeneity (I 2 99.2%); "small study effect" was observed using the Egger test (p=0.049). After removing two outlier studies, the pooled bleeding rate was 2% [95% CI 0-4], with high heterogeneity (I 2 99.2%), and no "small study effect" (p=0.257). The pooled UGIB rate was 1% (95% CI 0-3, I 2 98.6%, p=0.214), whereas the pooled LGIB rate was 1% (95% CI 0-2, I 2 64.7%, p=0.919). Metaregression analysis showed that overall estimates on gastrointestinal bleeding were affected by studies reporting different sources of bleeding. No significant association between gastrointestinal bleeding and mortality was found. In this meta-analysis of published studies, individuals with COVID-19 were found to be at risk for gastrointestinal bleeding, especially upper gastrointestinal bleeding.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/epidemiology , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology , Humans , Prevalence , SARS-CoV-2
6.
Eur J Clin Invest ; 51(2): e13458, 2021 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1066670

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Recent trials with dexamethasone and hydrocortisone have demonstrated benefit in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Data on methylprednisolone are limited. METHODS: Retrospective cohort of consecutive adults with severe COVID-19 pneumonia on high-flow oxygen (FiO2  ≥ 50%) admitted to an academic centre in New York, from 1 March to 15 April 2020. We used inverse probability of treatment weights to estimate the effect of methylprednisolone on clinical outcomes and intensive care resource utilization. RESULTS: Of 447 patients, 153 (34.2%) received methylprednisolone and 294 (65.8%) received no corticosteroids. At 28 days, 102 patients (22.8%) had died and 115 (25.7%) received mechanical ventilation. In weighted analyses, risk for death or mechanical ventilation was 37% lower with methylprednisolone (hazard ratio 0.63; 95% CI 0.47-0.86; P = .003), driven by less frequent mechanical ventilation (subhazard ratio 0.56; 95% CI 0.40-0.79; P = .001); mortality did not differ between groups. The methylprednisolone group had 2.8 more ventilator-free days (95% CI 0.5-5.1; P = .017) and 2.6 more intensive care-free days (95% CI 0.2-4.9; P = .033) during the first 28 days. Complication rates were not higher with methylprednisolone. CONCLUSIONS: In nonintubated patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia, methylprednisolone was associated with reduced need for mechanical ventilation and less-intensive care resource utilization without excess complications.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Continuous Positive Airway Pressure , Glucocorticoids/administration & dosage , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Methylprednisolone/administration & dosage , Oxygen Inhalation Therapy , Respiration, Artificial/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Bacteremia/epidemiology , COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/physiopathology , Female , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/epidemiology , Healthcare-Associated Pneumonia/epidemiology , Humans , Length of Stay , Male , Middle Aged , Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated/epidemiology , Proportional Hazards Models , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index , Treatment Outcome
8.
Surg Endosc ; 36(1): 361-366, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1046778

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, several questions have arisen about which endoscopic procedures (EPs) must be performed and which ones can be postponed. The aim of this study was to conduct a nationwide survey regarding the appropriate timing of EPs during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This prospective study was performed through a nationwide electronic survey. The survey consisted of 15 questions divided into three sections. The first evaluated the agreement for EPs classified as "time sensitive" and "not time sensitive". Two other sections assessed "high-priority" and "low-priority" scenarios. Agreement was considered when > 75% of respondents answered a question in the same direction. RESULTS: The response rate was 27.2% (214/784). Among the respondents, agreement for the need to perform EP in < 72 h was only reached for variceal bleeding (93.4%). Dysphagia with alarm symptoms was the scenario in which the highest percentage of physicians (95.9%) agreed that an EP needed to be performed within a month. Less than 30% of endoscopists would perform an EP within the first 72 h for patients with mild cholangitis, non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding without hemodynamic instability, or severe anaemia without overt bleeding. In time-sensitive clinical scenarios suggestive of benign disease, none of the scenarios reached agreement in any sense. Among the time-sensitive clinical scenarios suggestive of malignancy, > 90% of the surveyed respondents considered that EP could not be postponed for > 8 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: There was no consensus among endoscopists about the timing of EPs in patients with pathologies considered time sensitive or in those with high-priority pathologies. Agreement was only reached in five (17%) of the evaluated clinical scenarios.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Esophageal and Gastric Varices , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/epidemiology , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology , Humans , Pandemics , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
9.
Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci ; 24(22): 11919-11925, 2020 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-962025

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The pandemic from SARS-CoV-2 is having a profound impact on daily life of a large part of world population. Italy was the first Western country to impose a general lockdown to its citizens. Implications of these measures on several aspects of public health remain unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of the lockdown on surgical emergencies volumes and care in a large, tertiary referral center. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Electronic medical records of all patients visited in our Emergency Department (ED) and admitted in a surgical ward from February 21st 2020 to May 3rd 2020 were collected, analyzed and compared with the same periods of 2019 and 2018 and a cross-sectional study was performed. RESULTS: Number of surgical admissions dropped significantly in 2020 with respect to the same periods of 2019 and 2018, by almost 50%. The percentage distribution of admissions in different surgical wards did not change over the three years. Time from triage to operating room significantly reduced in 2020 respect to 2019 and 2018 (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The lockdown in Italy due to SARS-CoV-2 pandemic arguably represents the largest social experiment in modern times. Data provided by our study provide useful information to health authorities and policymakers about the effects of activity restriction on surgical accesses and changing epidemiology due to an exceptional external event.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cholecystitis, Acute/epidemiology , Gastrointestinal Diseases/epidemiology , Hospitalization/trends , Surgical Procedures, Operative/trends , Adult , Appendicitis/epidemiology , Appendicitis/surgery , Cholecystitis, Acute/surgery , Diverticulitis/epidemiology , Diverticulitis/surgery , Emergencies , Emergency Service, Hospital , Female , Gastrointestinal Diseases/surgery , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/epidemiology , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/surgery , Hernia/epidemiology , Herniorrhaphy/trends , Humans , Intestinal Obstruction/epidemiology , Intestinal Obstruction/surgery , Intestinal Perforation/epidemiology , Intestinal Perforation/surgery , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Rectal Diseases/epidemiology , Rectal Diseases/surgery , Surgery Department, Hospital , Tertiary Care Centers , Time-to-Treatment/trends
11.
Endoscopy ; 52(11): 1036-1038, 2020 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-900029

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has spread rapidly around the world. The Austrian government implemented a lockdown on 16 March to contain further spread of the disease. We investigated the effects of lockdown on acute upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding in Austria. METHODS: We contacted 98 Austrian hospitals performing emergency endoscopies. The hospitals were asked to report upper GI endoscopies performed for recent hematemesis, melena, or both, and exhibiting endoscopically visible signs of bleeding. The study period was from 3 weeks before (calendar Week 9) to 3 weeks after (Week 14) initiation of the lockdown. RESULTS: 61 % of Austrian hospitals, and importantly all major state hospitals, responded. A total of 575 upper GI bleedings occurred during the 3 weeks before and 341 during the 3 weeks after initiation of lockdown (40.7 % reduction). There was a 54.6 % decline in nonvariceal bleeding events at Week 14 compared with Week 9 (89 vs. 196), whereas rates of variceal hemorrhage did not change (15 vs. 17). CONCLUSIONS: National lockdown resulted in a dramatic decrease in upper GI bleeding events in Austrian hospitals.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Communicable Disease Control , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Esophageal and Gastric Varices/epidemiology , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/epidemiology , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Social Isolation , Austria , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Endoscopy , Esophageal and Gastric Varices/diagnosis , Esophageal and Gastric Varices/therapy , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/diagnosis , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/therapy , Humans , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , SARS-CoV-2
14.
S Afr Med J ; 110(9): 910-915, 2020 08 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-745268

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: With COVID-19 having spread across the globe, it has become standard to implement infection control strategies (colloquially known as lockdown) with the intention of reducing the magnitude and delaying the peak of the epidemiological curve. Personal infection mitigation strategies coupled with lockdown have caused a change in healthcare-seeking behaviour, with individuals not attending to their ill health as they previously did. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether admissions for urgent and emergency surgical pathologies have declined during the COVID-19 lockdown period, and the magnitude of the decline. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted, comparing pre-lockdown (3 February - 26 March 2020) and lockdown (27 March - 30 April 2020) admission incidences for surgical pathologies at a tertiary healthcare complex in North West Province, South Africa. Poisson regression models were created to determine admission incidence rate ratios (IRRs). RESULTS: Of 769 surgical admissions included in the analysis, 49.7% were male and 67.2% were unemployed. There was a 44% reduction in the incidence of non-trauma admissions during lockdown (IRR 0.56; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47 - 0.68; p<0.001) and a 53% reduction in the incidence of trauma-related admissions (IRR 0.47; 95% CI 0.34 - 0.66; p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Even when the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection was minimal, COVID-19 lockdown in North West was associated with a significant reduction in surgical admissions. In order to ensure an overall benefit to public health, a balance between maintaining the integrity of COVID-19 control mechanisms and access to healthcare services is essential.


Subject(s)
Appendicitis/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Soft Tissue Infections/epidemiology , Surgery Department, Hospital , Wounds and Injuries/epidemiology , Adult , Aged , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Emergencies , Employment/statistics & numerical data , Female , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/epidemiology , Humans , Intestinal Obstruction/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , South Africa/epidemiology , Tertiary Care Centers , Young Adult
15.
Am J Gastroenterol ; 115(10): 1609-1616, 2020 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-717821

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Although current literature has addressed gastrointestinal presentations including nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abnormal liver chemistries, and hyperlipasemia as possible coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) manifestations, the risk and type of gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) in this population is not well characterized. METHODS: This is a matched case-control (1:2) study with 41 cases of GIB (31 upper and 10 lower) in patients with COVID-19 and 82 matched controls of patients with COVID-19 without GIB. The primary objective was to characterize bleeding etiologies, and our secondary aim was to discuss outcomes and therapeutic approaches. RESULTS: There was no difference in the presenting symptoms of the cases and controls, and no difference in severity of COVID-19 manifestations (P > 0.05) was observed. Ten (32%) patients with upper GIB underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy and 5 (50%) patients with lower GIBs underwent flexible sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy. The most common upper and lower GIB etiologies were gastric or duodenal ulcers (80%) and rectal ulcers related to rectal tubes (60%), respectively. Four of the esophagogastroduodenoscopies resulted in therapeutic interventions, and the 3 patients with rectal ulcers were referred to colorectal surgery for rectal packing. Successful hemostasis was achieved in all 7 cases that required interventions. Transfusion requirements between patients who underwent endoscopic therapy and those who were conservatively managed were not significantly different. Anticoagulation and rectal tube usage trended toward being a risk factor for GIB, although it did not reach statistical significance. DISCUSSION: In COVID-19 patients with GIB, compared with matched controls of COVID-19 patients without GIB, there seemed to be no difference in initial presenting symptoms. Of those with upper and lower GIB, the most common etiology was peptic ulcer disease and rectal ulcers from rectal tubes, respectively. Conservative management seems to be a reasonable initial approach in managing these complex cases, but larger studies are needed to guide management.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/pathogenicity , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/epidemiology , Peptic Ulcer/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Rectal Diseases/epidemiology , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Anticoagulants/adverse effects , Blood Transfusion/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19 , Case-Control Studies , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Endoscopy/statistics & numerical data , Enema/adverse effects , Enema/instrumentation , Female , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/therapy , Hemostatic Techniques/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Peptic Ulcer/complications , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Rectal Diseases/etiology , Rectal Diseases/therapy , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2
16.
Clin Res Hepatol Gastroenterol ; 45(3): 101521, 2021 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-712926

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 patients have an increased susceptibility to develop thrombotic complications, thus thromboprophylaxis is warranted which may increase risk of upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). Our aim was to evaluate incidence of UGIB and use of upper GI endoscopy in COVID-19 inpatients. METHODS: The medical and endoscopic management of UGIB in non-ICU COVID-19 patients has been retrospectively evaluated. Glasgow Blatchford score was calculated at onset of signs of GI bleeding. Timing between onset of signs of GI bleeding and execution, if performed, of upper GI endoscopy was evaluated. Endoscopic characteristics and outcome of patients were evaluated overall or according to the execution or not of an upper GI endoscopy before and after 24h. RESULTS: Out of 4871 COVID-19 positive patients, 23 presented signs of UGIB and were included in the study (incidence 0.47%). The majority (78%) were on anticoagulant therapy or thromboprophylaxis. In 11 patients (48%) upper GI endoscopy was performed within 24h, whereas it was not performed in 5. Peptic ulcer was the most common finding (8/18). Mortality rate was 21.7% for worsening of COVID-19 infection. Mortality and rebleeding were not different between patients having upper GI endoscopy before or after 24h/not performed. Glasgow Blatchford score was similar between the two groups (13;12-16 vs 12;9-15). CONCLUSION: Upper GI bleeding complicated hospital stay in almost 0.5% of COVID-19 patients and peptic ulcer disease is the most common finding. Conservative management could be an option in patients that are at high risk of respiratory complications.


Subject(s)
Anticoagulants/adverse effects , COVID-19/complications , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/epidemiology , Upper Gastrointestinal Tract , Venous Thromboembolism/prevention & control , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , Female , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/diagnosis , Humans , Incidence , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Venous Thromboembolism/etiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL