Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 166
Filter
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
1.
Int J Immunopathol Pharmacol ; 35: 20587384211059675, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1582485

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The fully-human monoclonal anti-interleukin (IL)-1ß antibody canakinumab may inhibit the production of inflammatory mediators in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and the hyperinflammatory response potentially leading to acute respiratory distress syndrome. OBJECTIVES: The goal of our retrospective, observational analysis was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of subcutaneous (s.c.) canakinumab in combination with our standard of care (SOC) treatment of selected patients with COVID-19 with respiratory failure and elevated reactive pro-inflammatory markers. METHODS: Eight participants received two doses of s.c. canakinumab 150 mg (or 2 mg/kg for participants weighing ≤40 kg) in addition to SOC. 12 patients received only SOC treatment. RESULTS: Canakinumab treatment reduced the need for mechanical ventilation and reduced proinflammatory markers, resulting in an amelioration of the final outcome, with respect to the control group who received SOC alone. The treatment was safe and well tolerated; no adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: The use of canakinumab (300 mg, s.c.) in the early stage of COVID-19 with mild-to-moderate respiratory failure was superior to SOC at preventing clinical deterioration and may warrant further investigation as a treatment option for patients with COVID-19 who experience a hyperinflammatory response in the early stage of the disease.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , COVID-19 , Interleukin-1beta , Respiration, Artificial , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/administration & dosage , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/immunology , Biomarkers/blood , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/therapy , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Female , Humans , Inflammation Mediators/blood , Interleukin-1beta/antagonists & inhibitors , Interleukin-1beta/immunology , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Monitoring, Immunologic/methods , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Patient Selection , Respiration, Artificial/methods , Respiration, Artificial/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Time-to-Treatment
2.
PLoS One ; 16(12): e0261115, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1574235

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The United States is experiencing a drug addiction and overdose crisis, made worse by the COVID-19 pandemic. Relative to other types of health services, addiction treatment and overdose prevention services are particularly vulnerable to disaster-related disruptions for multiple reasons including fragmentation from the general medical system and stigma, which may lead decisionmakers and providers to de-prioritize these services during disasters. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, U.S. states implemented multiple policies designed to mitigate disruptions to addiction treatment and overdose prevention services, for example policies expanding access to addiction treatment delivered via telehealth and policies designed to support continuity of naloxone distribution programs. There is limited evidence on the effects of these policies on addiction treatment and overdose. This evidence is needed to inform state policy design in future disasters, as well as to inform decisions regarding whether to sustain these policies post-pandemic. METHODS: The overall study uses a concurrent-embedded design. Aims 1-2 use difference-in-differences analyses of large-scale observational databases to examine how state policies designed to mitigate the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on health services delivery influenced addiction treatment delivery and overdose during the pandemic. Aim 3 uses a qualitative embedded multiple case study approach, in which we characterize local implementation of the state policies of interest; most public health disaster policies are enacted at the state level but implemented at the local level by healthcare systems and local public health authorities. DISCUSSION: Triangulation of results across methods will yield robust understanding of whether and how state disaster-response policies influenced drug addiction treatment and overdose during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results will inform policy enactment and implementation in future public health disasters. Results will also inform decisions about whether to sustain COVID-19 pandemic-related changes to policies governing delivery addiction and overdose prevention services long-term.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Delivery of Health Care/methods , Drug Overdose/drug therapy , Substance-Related Disorders/therapy , Disasters , Drug Overdose/mortality , Health Policy , Health Services , Humans , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , United States
3.
Lancet Respir Med ; 9(5): 487-497, 2021 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1537196

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Lung transplantation is a life-saving treatment for patients with end-stage lung disease; however, it is infrequently considered for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) attributable to infectious causes. We aimed to describe the course of disease and early post-transplantation outcomes in critically ill patients with COVID-19 who failed to show lung recovery despite optimal medical management and were deemed to be at imminent risk of dying due to pulmonary complications. METHODS: We established a multi-institutional case series that included the first consecutive transplants for severe COVID-19-associated ARDS known to us in the USA, Italy, Austria, and India. De-identified data from participating centres-including information relating to patient demographics and pre-COVID-19 characteristics, pretransplantation disease course, perioperative challenges, pathology of explanted lungs, and post-transplantation outcomes-were collected by Northwestern University (Chicago, IL, USA) and analysed. FINDINGS: Between May 1 and Sept 30, 2020, 12 patients with COVID-19-associated ARDS underwent bilateral lung transplantation at six high-volume transplant centres in the USA (eight recipients at three centres), Italy (two recipients at one centre), Austria (one recipient), and India (one recipient). The median age of recipients was 48 years (IQR 41-51); three of the 12 patients were female. Chest imaging before transplantation showed severe lung damage that did not improve despite prolonged mechanical ventilation and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. The lung transplant procedure was technically challenging, with severe pleural adhesions, hilar lymphadenopathy, and increased intraoperative transfusion requirements. Pathology of the explanted lungs showed extensive, ongoing acute lung injury with features of lung fibrosis. There was no recurrence of SARS-CoV-2 in the allografts. All patients with COVID-19 could be weaned off extracorporeal support and showed short-term survival similar to that of transplant recipients without COVID-19. INTERPRETATION: The findings from our report show that lung transplantation is the only option for survival in some patients with severe, unresolving COVID-19-associated ARDS, and that the procedure can be done successfully, with good early post-transplantation outcomes, in carefully selected patients. FUNDING: National Institutes of Health. VIDEO ABSTRACT.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Critical Illness/therapy , Lung Transplantation/methods , Lung , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Blood Transfusion/methods , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/physiopathology , COVID-19/surgery , Critical Care/methods , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation/methods , Female , Humans , Intraoperative Care/methods , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Lung/pathology , Male , Middle Aged , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Pulmonary Fibrosis/etiology , Pulmonary Fibrosis/pathology , Respiration, Artificial/methods , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/etiology , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/surgery , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity
4.
PLoS One ; 16(11): e0259226, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1502072

ABSTRACT

When emerging technologies transform an organization's way of working, explorative business process management (BPM) becomes a new challenge. Although digital innovations can boost process efficacy and business productivity, employees do not necessarily accept the implied work changes. We therefore looked at the increased digitalization efforts during the COVID-19 lockdowns, during which employees were forced to drastically rethink work by heavily depending on technology for communication and almost all business tasks. This global setting allowed us to scrutinize disruptive work changes and how employees can cope with disruptive work adaptations. We also looked into the explorative skillset needed to adapt to these changes. To theorize about an explorative BPM acceptance model, eleven hypotheses were supported based on a solid theoretical foundation. We followed a quantitative research design using partial least squares for structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) at the university administration settings in two regions, including purposive sampling. Data analysis covered both a measurement model assessment and structural model assessment. Our findings reveal that employees' perceived work modalities, feeling creative and feeling flexible are more promising features than perceived influence and attitude related to explorative work and skill development. We also offer novel insights into explorative business process management (BPM) skills, and which skills are more productive in uncertain or dynamic working conditions. This research is a learning path for managers struggling with flexible or competitive business environments, and more specifically to facilitate employee willingness.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Commerce , Communicable Disease Control/methods , Employment , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Pandemics , Adult , Aged , Algorithms , Creativity , Female , Humans , Learning , Least-Squares Analysis , Male , Middle Aged , Models, Organizational , SARS-CoV-2 , Technology , Young Adult
5.
BMC Nephrol ; 22(1): 359, 2021 11 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1496153

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is common among patients hospitalised with COVID-19 and associated with worse prognosis. The aim of this study was to investigate the epidemiology, risk factors and outcomes of AKI in patients with COVID-19 in a large UK tertiary centre. METHODS: We analysed data of consecutive adults admitted with a laboratory-confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 across two sites of a hospital in London, UK, from 1st January to 13th May 2020. RESULTS: Of the 1248 inpatients included, 487 (39%) experienced AKI (51% stage 1, 13% stage 2, and 36% stage 3). The weekly AKI incidence rate gradually increased to peak at week 5 (3.12 cases/100 patient-days), before reducing to its nadir (0.83 cases/100 patient-days) at the end the study period (week 10). Among AKI survivors, 84.0% had recovered renal function to pre-admission levels before discharge and none required on-going renal replacement therapy (RRT). Pre-existing renal impairment [odds ratio (OR) 3.05, 95%CI 2.24-4,18; p <  0.0001], and inpatient diuretic use (OR 1.79, 95%CI 1.27-2.53; p <  0.005) were independently associated with a higher risk for AKI. AKI was a strong predictor of 30-day mortality with an increasing risk across AKI stages [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.59 (95%CI 1.19-2.13) for stage 1; p < 0.005, 2.71(95%CI 1.82-4.05); p < 0.001for stage 2 and 2.99 (95%CI 2.17-4.11); p < 0.001for stage 3]. One third of AKI3 survivors (30.7%), had newly established renal impairment at 3 to 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: This large UK cohort demonstrated a high AKI incidence and was associated with increased mortality even at stage 1. Inpatient diuretic use was linked to a higher AKI risk. One third of survivors with AKI3 exhibited newly established renal impairment already at 3-6 months.


Subject(s)
Acute Kidney Injury , COVID-19 , Renal Replacement Therapy , Acute Kidney Injury/diagnosis , Acute Kidney Injury/etiology , Acute Kidney Injury/mortality , Acute Kidney Injury/therapy , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Incidence , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Kidney Function Tests/methods , Male , Middle Aged , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Patient Acuity , Renal Replacement Therapy/methods , Renal Replacement Therapy/statistics & numerical data , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Severity of Illness Index , United Kingdom/epidemiology
7.
BMC Cardiovasc Disord ; 21(1): 434, 2021 09 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1413998

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus-disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic imposed an unprecedented burden on the provision of cardiac surgical services. The reallocation of workforce and resources necessitated the postponement of elective operations in this cohort of high-risk patients. We investigated the impact of this outbreak on the aortic valve surgery activity at a single two-site centre in the United Kingdom. METHODS: Data were extracted from the local surgical database, including the demographics, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of patients operated on from March 2020 to May 2020 with only one of the two sites resuming operative activity and compared with the respective 2019 period. A similar comparison was conducted with the period between June 2020 and August 2020, when operative activity was restored at both institutional sites. The experience of centres world-wide was invoked to assess the efficiency of our services. RESULTS: There was an initial 38.2% reduction in the total number of operations with a 70% reduction in elective cases, compared with a 159% increase in urgent and emergency operations. The attendant surgical risk was significantly higher [median Euroscore II was 2.7 [1.9-5.2] in 2020 versus 2.1 [0.9-3.7] in 2019 (p = 0.005)] but neither 30-day survival nor freedom from major post-operative complications (re-sternotomy for bleeding/tamponade, transient ischemic attack/stroke, renal replacement therapy) was compromised (p > 0.05 for all comparisons). Recommencement of activity at both institutional sites conferred a surgical volume within 17% of the pre-COVID-19 era. CONCLUSIONS: Our institution managed to offer a considerable volume of aortic valve surgical activity over the first COVID-19 outbreak to a cohort of higher-risk patients, without compromising post-operative outcomes. A backlog of elective cases is expected to develop, the accommodation of which after surgical activity normalisation will be crucial to monitor.


Subject(s)
Aortic Valve/surgery , COVID-19 , Cardiac Surgical Procedures/trends , Heart Valve Diseases/surgery , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care/trends , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/trends , Surgeons/trends , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cardiac Surgical Procedures/adverse effects , Cardiac Surgical Procedures/mortality , Databases, Factual , Elective Surgical Procedures/trends , Female , Heart Valve Diseases/mortality , Humans , London , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Safety , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
9.
BMC Cardiovasc Disord ; 21(1): 434, 2021 09 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1406707

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus-disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic imposed an unprecedented burden on the provision of cardiac surgical services. The reallocation of workforce and resources necessitated the postponement of elective operations in this cohort of high-risk patients. We investigated the impact of this outbreak on the aortic valve surgery activity at a single two-site centre in the United Kingdom. METHODS: Data were extracted from the local surgical database, including the demographics, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of patients operated on from March 2020 to May 2020 with only one of the two sites resuming operative activity and compared with the respective 2019 period. A similar comparison was conducted with the period between June 2020 and August 2020, when operative activity was restored at both institutional sites. The experience of centres world-wide was invoked to assess the efficiency of our services. RESULTS: There was an initial 38.2% reduction in the total number of operations with a 70% reduction in elective cases, compared with a 159% increase in urgent and emergency operations. The attendant surgical risk was significantly higher [median Euroscore II was 2.7 [1.9-5.2] in 2020 versus 2.1 [0.9-3.7] in 2019 (p = 0.005)] but neither 30-day survival nor freedom from major post-operative complications (re-sternotomy for bleeding/tamponade, transient ischemic attack/stroke, renal replacement therapy) was compromised (p > 0.05 for all comparisons). Recommencement of activity at both institutional sites conferred a surgical volume within 17% of the pre-COVID-19 era. CONCLUSIONS: Our institution managed to offer a considerable volume of aortic valve surgical activity over the first COVID-19 outbreak to a cohort of higher-risk patients, without compromising post-operative outcomes. A backlog of elective cases is expected to develop, the accommodation of which after surgical activity normalisation will be crucial to monitor.


Subject(s)
Aortic Valve/surgery , COVID-19 , Cardiac Surgical Procedures/trends , Heart Valve Diseases/surgery , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care/trends , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/trends , Surgeons/trends , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cardiac Surgical Procedures/adverse effects , Cardiac Surgical Procedures/mortality , Databases, Factual , Elective Surgical Procedures/trends , Female , Heart Valve Diseases/mortality , Humans , London , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Safety , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
10.
Oncology (Williston Park) ; 35(8): 459, 2021 08 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1359547

ABSTRACT

ONCOLOGY® co-editor-in-chief Howard S. Hochster, MD, reviews research on delays in oncology care as a results of the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Delayed Diagnosis/trends , Early Detection of Cancer/trends , Neoplasms/diagnosis , Time-to-Treatment/trends , Humans , Medical Oncology/standards , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Risk Factors , Time-to-Treatment/statistics & numerical data
11.
Cerebrovasc Dis ; 50(2): 185-199, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1348201

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Posterior circulation stroke is characterized by poor prognosis because its optimal thrombolysis "time window" is always missed. After mechanical thrombectomy (MT), the recanalization rate of posterior circulation obstruction is significantly increased, but prognosis remains poor. To best manage patients, prognostic factors are needed to inform MT triaging after posterior circulation stroke. METHODS: A systematic literature search was done for the period through April 2020. Studies included those with posterior circulation stroke cases that underwent MT. The primary outcome measure in this study was the modified Rankin Scale on day 90. RESULTS: No outcome differences were found in gender, atrial fibrillation, smoking, and coronary artery disease (OR = 1.07, 95% CI: 0.90-1.28; OR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.82-1.26; OR = 1.26, 95% CI: 0.94-1.68; and OR = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.58-1.22, respectively). Hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and previous stroke correlated with poorer prognosis (OR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.48-0.77; OR = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.50-0.73; and OR = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.55-0.99, respectively). However, hyperlipidemia correlated with better prognosis (OR = 1.28, 95% CI: 1.04-1.58). CONCLUSION: Our analysis indicates that hypertension, diabetes mellitus, or previous stroke correlate with poorer outcomes. Intriguingly, hyperlipidemia correlates with better prognosis. These factors may help inform triage decisions when considering MT for posterior circulation stroke patients. However, large, multicenter, randomized controlled trials are needed to validate these observations.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Ischemic Stroke/therapy , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care/trends , Patient Admission/trends , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/trends , Thrombectomy/trends , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Hospital Mortality/trends , Humans , Ischemic Stroke/diagnosis , Ischemic Stroke/mortality , Male , Middle Aged , Quality Indicators, Health Care/trends , Recovery of Function , Referral and Consultation/trends , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Thrombectomy/adverse effects , Thrombectomy/mortality , Time Factors , Time-to-Treatment/trends , Treatment Outcome
12.
Open Heart ; 8(2)2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1341341

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has seen the introduction of important public health measures to minimise the spread of the virus. We aim to identify the impact government restrictions and hospital-based infection control procedures on ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) care during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Patients meeting ST elevation criteria and undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention from 27 March 2020, the day initial national lockdown measures were announced in Ireland, were included in the study. Patients presenting after the lockdown period, from 18 May to 31 June 2020, were also examined. Time from symptom onset to first medical contact (FMC), transfer time and time of wire cross was noted. Additionally, patient characteristics, left ventricular ejection fraction, mortality and biochemical parameters were documented. Outcomes and characteristics were compared against a control group of patients meeting ST elevation criteria during the month of January. RESULTS: A total of 42 patients presented with STEMI during the lockdown period. A significant increase in total ischaemic time (TIT) was noted versus controls (8.81 hours (±16.4) vs 2.99 hours (±1.39), p=0.03), with increases driven largely by delays in seeking FMC (7.13 hours (±16.4) vs 1.98 hours (±1.46), p=0.049). TIT remained significantly elevated during the postlockdown period (6.1 hours (±5.3), p=0.05), however, an improvement in patient delays was seen versus the control group (3.99 hours (±4.5), p=0.06). There was no difference seen in transfer times and door to wire cross time during lockdown, however, a significant increase in transfer times was seen postlockdown versus controls (1.81 hours (±1.0) vs 1.1 hours (±0.87), p=0.004). CONCLUSION: A significant increase in TIT was seen during the lockdown period driven mainly by patient factors highlighting the significance of public health messages on public perception. Additionally, a significant delay in transfer times to our centre was seen postlockdown.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care/trends , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/trends , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Aged , Databases, Factual , Female , Humans , Infection Control/trends , Ireland , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , Patient Transfer/trends , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/adverse effects , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/mortality , Retrospective Studies , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/diagnostic imaging , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Time Factors , Time-to-Treatment/trends , Treatment Outcome
13.
Lancet Respir Med ; 9(8): 863-872, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1340915

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 entry in human cells depends on angiotensin-converting enzyme 2, which can be upregulated by inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS). We aimed to test our hypothesis that discontinuation of chronic treatment with ACE-inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) mitigates the course o\f recent-onset COVID-19. METHODS: ACEI-COVID was a parallel group, randomised, controlled, open-label trial done at 35 centres in Austria and Germany. Patients aged 18 years and older were enrolled if they presented with recent symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection and were chronically treated with ACEIs or ARBs. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to discontinuation or continuation of RAS inhibition for 30 days. Primary outcome was the maximum sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score within 30 days, where death was scored with the maximum achievable SOFA score. Secondary endpoints were area under the death-adjusted SOFA score (AUCSOFA), mean SOFA score, admission to the intensive care unit, mechanical ventilation, and death. Analyses were done on a modified intention-to-treat basis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04353596. FINDINGS: Between April 20, 2020, and Jan 20, 2021, 204 patients (median age 75 years [IQR 66-80], 37% females) were randomly assigned to discontinue (n=104) or continue (n=100) RAS inhibition. Within 30 days, eight (8%) of 104 died in the discontinuation group and 12 (12%) of 100 patients died in the continuation group (p=0·42). There was no significant difference in the primary endpoint between the discontinuation and continuation group (median [IQR] maximum SOFA score 0·00 (0·00-2·00) vs 1·00 (0·00-3·00); p=0·12). Discontinuation was associated with a significantly lower AUCSOFA (0·00 [0·00-9·25] vs 3·50 [0·00-23·50]; p=0·040), mean SOFA score (0·00 [0·00-0·31] vs 0·12 [0·00-0·78]; p=0·040), and 30-day SOFA score (0·00 [10-90th percentile, 0·00-1·20] vs 0·00 [0·00-24·00]; p=0·023). At 30 days, 11 (11%) in the discontinuation group and 23 (23%) in the continuation group had signs of organ dysfunction (SOFA score ≥1) or were dead (p=0·017). There were no significant differences for mechanical ventilation (10 (10%) vs 8 (8%), p=0·87) and admission to intensive care unit (20 [19%] vs 18 [18%], p=0·96) between the discontinuation and continuation group. INTERPRETATION: Discontinuation of RAS-inhibition in COVID-19 had no significant effect on the maximum severity of COVID-19 but may lead to a faster and better recovery. The decision to continue or discontinue should be made on an individual basis, considering the risk profile, the indication for RAS inhibition, and the availability of alternative therapies and outpatient monitoring options. FUNDING: Austrian Science Fund and German Center for Cardiovascular Research.


Subject(s)
Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors , COVID-19 , Hypertension , Renin-Angiotensin System , SARS-CoV-2 , Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/administration & dosage , Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/adverse effects , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2/metabolism , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/adverse effects , Area Under Curve , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/metabolism , COVID-19/therapy , Female , Humans , Hypertension/drug therapy , Hypertension/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Organ Dysfunction Scores , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Renin-Angiotensin System/drug effects , Renin-Angiotensin System/physiology , Risk Adjustment/methods , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects , SARS-CoV-2/physiology , Severity of Illness Index , Withholding Treatment/statistics & numerical data
14.
Lancet Respir Med ; 9(8): 851-862, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1340912

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In the Île-de-France region (henceforth termed Greater Paris), extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) was considered early in the COVID-19 pandemic. We report ECMO network organisation and outcomes during the first wave of the pandemic. METHODS: In this multicentre cohort study, we present an analysis of all adult patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe ARDS requiring ECMO who were admitted to 17 Greater Paris intensive care units between March 8 and June 3, 2020. Central regulation for ECMO indications and pooling of resources were organised for the Greater Paris intensive care units, with six mobile ECMO teams available for the region. Details of complications (including ECMO-related complications, renal replacement therapy, and pulmonary embolism), clinical outcomes, survival status at 90 days after ECMO initiation, and causes of death are reported. Multivariable analysis was used to identify pre-ECMO variables independently associated with 90-day survival after ECMO. FINDINGS: The 302 patients included who underwent ECMO had a median age of 52 years (IQR 45-58) and Simplified Acute Physiology Score-II of 40 (31-56), and 235 (78%) of whom were men. 165 (55%) were transferred after cannulation by a mobile ECMO team. Before ECMO, 285 (94%) patients were prone positioned, median driving pressure was 18 cm H2O (14-21), and median ratio of the partial pressure of arterial oxygen to the fraction of inspired oxygen was 61 mm Hg (IQR 54-70). During ECMO, 115 (43%) of 270 patients had a major bleeding event, 27 of whom had intracranial haemorrhage; 130 (43%) of 301 patients received renal replacement therapy; and 53 (18%) of 294 had a pulmonary embolism. 138 (46%) patients were alive 90 days after ECMO. The most common causes of death were multiorgan failure (53 [18%] patients) and septic shock (47 [16%] patients). Shorter time between intubation and ECMO (odds ratio 0·91 [95% CI 0·84-0·99] per day decrease), younger age (2·89 [1·41-5·93] for ≤48 years and 2·01 [1·01-3·99] for 49-56 years vs ≥57 years), lower pre-ECMO renal component of the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score (0·67, 0·55-0·83 per point increase), and treatment in centres managing at least 30 venovenous ECMO cases annually (2·98 [1·46-6·04]) were independently associated with improved 90-day survival. There was no significant difference in survival between patients who had mobile and on-site ECMO initiation. INTERPRETATION: Beyond associations with similar factors to those reported on ECMO for non-COVID-19 ARDS, 90-day survival among ECMO-assisted patients with COVID-19 was strongly associated with a centre's experience in venovenous ECMO during the previous year. Early ECMO management in centres with a high venovenous ECMO case volume should be advocated, by applying centralisation and regulation of ECMO indications, which should also help to prevent a shortage of resources. FUNDING: None.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Intensive Care Units , Pulmonary Embolism , Renal Insufficiency , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/physiopathology , COVID-19/therapy , Cohort Studies , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation/adverse effects , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation/methods , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation/statistics & numerical data , Female , France/epidemiology , Humans , Intensive Care Units/organization & administration , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Pulmonary Embolism/epidemiology , Pulmonary Embolism/etiology , Renal Insufficiency/epidemiology , Renal Insufficiency/etiology , Renal Insufficiency/therapy , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/virology , SARS-CoV-2 , Survival Analysis
15.
J Minim Invasive Gynecol ; 28(7): 1411-1419.e1, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1322221

ABSTRACT

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on surgical volume and emergency department (ED) consults across obstetrics-gynecology (OB-GYN) services at a New York City hospital. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Tertiary care academic medical center in New York City. PATIENTS: Women undergoing OB-GYN ED consults or surgeries between February 1, 2020 and April 15, 2020. INTERVENTIONS: March 16 institutional moratorium on elective surgeries. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The volume and types of surgeries and ED consults were compared before and after the COVID-19 moratorium. During the pandemic, the average weekly volume of ED consults and gynecology (GYN) surgeries decreased, whereas obstetric (OB) surgeries remained stable. The proportions of OB-GYN ED consults, GYN surgeries, and OB surgeries relative to all ED consults, all surgeries, and all labor and delivery patients were 1.87%, 13.8%, 54.6% in the pre-COVID-19 time frame (February 1-March 15) vs 1.53%, 21.3%, 79.7% in the COVID-19 time frame (March 16-April 15), representing no significant difference in proportions of OB-GYN ED consults (p = .464) and GYN surgeries (p = .310) before and during COVID-19, with a proportionate increase in OB surgeries (p <.002). The distribution of GYN surgical case types changed significantly during the pandemic with higher proportions of emergent surgeries for ectopic pregnancies, miscarriages, and concern for cancer (p <.001). Alternatively, the OB surgery distribution of case types remained relatively constant. CONCLUSION: This study highlights how the pandemic has affected the ways that patients in OB-GYN access and receive care. Institutional policies suspending elective surgeries during the pandemic decreased GYN surgical volume and affected the types of cases performed. This decrease was not appreciated for OB surgical volume, reflecting the nonelective and time-sensitive nature of obstetric care. A decrease in ED consults was noted during the pandemic begging the question "Where have all the emergencies gone?" Although the moratorium on elective procedures was necessary, "elective" GYN surgeries remain medically indicated to address symptoms such as pain and bleeding and to prevent serious medical sequelae such as severe anemia requiring transfusion. As we continue to battle COVID-19, we must not lose sight of those patients whose care has been deferred.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Emergencies/epidemiology , Gynecologic Surgical Procedures/statistics & numerical data , Obstetric Surgical Procedures/statistics & numerical data , Obstetrics and Gynecology Department, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , New York City/epidemiology , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Pregnancy , Referral and Consultation/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
16.
J Am Geriatr Soc ; 69(10): 2752-2758, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1301522

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Older adults are at the highest risk of severe disease and death due to COVID-19. Randomized data have shown that baricitinib improves outcomes in these patients, but focused stratified analyses of geriatric cohorts are lacking. Our objective was to analyze the efficacy of baricitinib in older adults with COVID-19 moderate-to-severe pneumonia. METHODS: This is a propensity score [PS]-matched retrospective cohort study. Patients from the COVID-AGE and Alba-Score cohorts, hospitalized for moderate-to-severe COVID-19 pneumonia, were categorized in two age brackets of age <70 years old (86 with baricitinib and 86 PS-matched controls) or ≥70 years old (78 on baricitinib and 78 PS-matched controls). Thirty-day mortality rates were analyzed with Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard models. RESULTS: Mean age was 79.1 for those ≥70 years and 58.9 for those <70. Exactly 29.6% were female. Treatment with baricitinib resulted in a significant reduction in death from any cause by 48% in patients aged 70 or older, an 18.5% reduction in 30-day absolute mortality risk (n/N: 16/78 [20.5%] baricitinib, 30/78 [38.5%] in PS-matched controls, p < 0.001) and a lower 30-day adjusted fatality rate (HR 0.21; 95% CI 0.09-0.47; p < 0.001). Beneficial effects on mortality were also observed in the age group <70 (8.1% reduction in 30-day absolute mortality risk; HR 0.14; 95% CI 0.03-0.64; p = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: Baricitinib is associated with an absolute mortality risk reduction of 18.5% in adults older than 70 years hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia.


Subject(s)
Azetidines , COVID-19 , Pneumonia, Viral , Purines , Pyrazoles , Sulfonamides , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antiviral Agents/administration & dosage , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , Azetidines/administration & dosage , Azetidines/adverse effects , COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/physiopathology , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Janus Kinase Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Janus Kinase Inhibitors/adverse effects , Male , Mortality , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Purines/administration & dosage , Purines/adverse effects , Pyrazoles/administration & dosage , Pyrazoles/adverse effects , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Severity of Illness Index , Spain/epidemiology , Sulfonamides/administration & dosage , Sulfonamides/adverse effects
18.
BMC Cardiovasc Disord ; 21(1): 327, 2021 07 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1295438

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The relative association between cardiovascular (CV) risk factors, such as diabetes and hypertension, established CV disease (CVD), and susceptibility to CV complications or mortality in COVID-19 remains unclear. METHODS: We conducted a cohort study of consecutive adults hospitalised for severe COVID-19 between 1st March and 30th June 2020. Pre-existing CVD, CV risk factors and associations with mortality and CV complications were ascertained. RESULTS: Among 1721 patients (median age 71 years, 57% male), 349 (20.3%) had pre-existing CVD (CVD), 888 (51.6%) had CV risk factors without CVD (RF-CVD), 484 (28.1%) had neither. Patients with CVD were older with a higher burden of non-CV comorbidities. During follow-up, 438 (25.5%) patients died: 37% with CVD, 25.7% with RF-CVD and 16.5% with neither. CVD was independently associated with in-hospital mortality among patients < 70 years of age (adjusted HR 2.43 [95% CI 1.16-5.07]), but not in those ≥ 70 years (aHR 1.14 [95% CI 0.77-1.69]). RF-CVD were not independently associated with mortality in either age group (< 70 y aHR 1.21 [95% CI 0.72-2.01], ≥ 70 y aHR 1.07 [95% CI 0.76-1.52]). Most CV complications occurred in patients with CVD (66%) versus RF-CVD (17%) or neither (11%; p < 0.001). 213 [12.4%] patients developed venous thromboembolism (VTE). CVD was not an independent predictor of VTE. CONCLUSIONS: In patients hospitalised with COVID-19, pre-existing established CVD appears to be a more important contributor to mortality than CV risk factors in the absence of CVD. CVD-related hazard may be mediated, in part, by new CV complications. Optimal care and vigilance for destabilised CVD are essential in this patient group. Trial registration n/a.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cardiovascular Diseases , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology , Hospital Mortality , Hypertension/epidemiology , Venous Thromboembolism , Age Factors , Aged , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/physiopathology , COVID-19/therapy , Cardiovascular Diseases/complications , Cardiovascular Diseases/diagnosis , Cardiovascular Diseases/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Female , Heart Disease Risk Factors , Humans , Male , Mortality , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Risk Assessment/methods , Risk Assessment/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , United Kingdom/epidemiology , Venous Thromboembolism/diagnosis , Venous Thromboembolism/epidemiology , Venous Thromboembolism/etiology
19.
J Investig Med ; 69(7): 1287-1296, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1276980

ABSTRACT

This systematic and meta-review aimed to compare clinical presentation, outcomes, and care management among patients with COVID-19 during the early phase of the pandemic. A total of 77 peer-reviewed publications were identified between January 1, 2020 and April 9, 2020 from PubMed, Google Scholar, and Chinese Medical Journal databases. Subsequently, meta-analysis of 40 non-overlapping studies, comprising of 4844 patients from seven countries, was conducted to see differences in clinical characteristics and laboratory outcomes across patients from different geographical regions (Wuhan, other parts of China and outside China), severity (non-severe, severe and fatal) and age groups (adults and children). Patients from Wuhan had a higher mean age (54.3 years) and rates of dyspnea (39.5%) compared with patients from other parts of China and outside China. Myalgia, fatigue, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and fatalities were also significantly more prevalent among Wuhan patients. A significant dose-response increase in prevalence of diabetes, D-dimer, white blood cells, neutrophil levels and ARDS was seen from non-severe to severe and fatal outcomes. A significant increase in mean duration of symptom onset to admission was seen between non-severe cases (4.2 days) and severe and fatal cases (6.3 days and 8.8 days, respectively). Proportion of asymptomatic cases was higher in children (20%) compared with adults (2.4%). In conclusion, patients with COVID-19 from Wuhan displayed more severe clinical disease during the early phase of the pandemic, while disease severity was significantly lesser among pediatric cases. This review suggests that biomarkers at admission may be useful for prognosis among patients with COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Symptom Assessment/statistics & numerical data , Adult , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/physiopathology , COVID-19/therapy , Child , Global Health/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Mortality , Observational Studies as Topic , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Prognosis , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index
20.
Kidney Int ; 99(6): 1275-1279, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1272596

ABSTRACT

In this issue of Kidney International, the initial experience regarding the immunogenicity of prior coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection and the response to the COVID-19 vaccines among patients on maintenance dialysis and kidney transplant recipients is summarized. Preliminary data suggest that there is durability of immune response after COVID-19 infection. Although immune response to the first dose of vaccine is less in infection-naïve patients than healthy individuals in both groups, after the second vaccine dose a significant portion of patients receiving maintenance dialysis develop robust antibody titers, whereas kidney transplant recipients show a less-strong immune response.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Kidney Transplantation , Renal Dialysis , Aged , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Female , Humans , Immunity , Male , Middle Aged , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Pandemics/prevention & control , Renal Replacement Therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...