Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 712
Filter
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
2.
Gac Med Mex ; 157(3): 245-250, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1604118

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: In patients with COVID-19, olfactory dysfunction and anosmia have been reported, which in pregnant women occur in up to 24.2 %. OBJECTIVE: To know the frequency at which pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 infection have olfactory dysfunction. METHODS: Age, gestational age, temperature, presence of nasal constipation or rhinorrhea, myalgia, headache, cough or chest pain were asked. Whether patients perceived and identified the scent of grape juice, coffee powder and menthol was evaluated. Central tendency and dispersion measures, frequencies and percentages were used. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value were calculated. Mann-Whitney's U-test and contrast of proportions were used for comparisons between groups. RESULTS: There was a higher proportion of women with cough, headache, dyspnea, myalgia, odynophagia, rhinorrhea, chest pain, and anosmia in SARS-CoV-2-positive women. In patients without COVID-19, 88.9 % detected each one of the scents; only 31.8 % of the positive group detected grapes scent, 47.7 % coffee and 59.1 % menthol, which had the highest percentages of sensitivity (40 %), specificity (21 %), positive predictive value (59 %) and negative predictive value (11 %). CONCLUSION: Olfactory dysfunction occurs in a significant percentage of pregnant women with COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Anosmia/epidemiology , COVID-19/complications , Olfaction Disorders/epidemiology , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/epidemiology , Adolescent , Adult , Anosmia/virology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Olfaction Disorders/virology , Predictive Value of Tests , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/virology , Prospective Studies , Sensitivity and Specificity , Young Adult
3.
BMC Pulm Med ; 22(1): 1, 2022 Jan 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1608729

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Quantitative evaluation of radiographic images has been developed and suggested for the diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, there are limited opportunities to use these image-based diagnostic indices in clinical practice. Our aim in this study was to evaluate the utility of a novel visually-based classification of pulmonary findings from computed tomography (CT) images of COVID-19 patients with the following three patterns defined: peripheral, multifocal, and diffuse findings of pneumonia. We also evaluated the prognostic value of this classification to predict the severity of COVID-19. METHODS: This was a single-center retrospective cohort study of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 between January 1st and September 30th, 2020, who presented with suspicious findings on CT lung images at admission (n = 69). We compared the association between the three predefined patterns (peripheral, multifocal, and diffuse), admission to the intensive care unit, tracheal intubation, and death. We tested quantitative CT analysis as an outcome predictor for COVID-19. Quantitative CT analysis was performed using a semi-automated method (Thoracic Volume Computer-Assisted Reading software, GE Health care, United States). Lungs were divided by Hounsfield unit intervals. Compromised lung (%CL) volume was the sum of poorly and non-aerated volumes (- 500, 100 HU). We collected patient clinical data, including demographic and clinical variables at the time of admission. RESULTS: Patients with a diffuse pattern were intubated more frequently and for a longer duration than patients with a peripheral or multifocal pattern. The following clinical variables were significantly different between the diffuse pattern and peripheral and multifocal groups: body temperature (p = 0.04), lymphocyte count (p = 0.01), neutrophil count (p = 0.02), c-reactive protein (p < 0.01), lactate dehydrogenase (p < 0.01), Krebs von den Lungen-6 antigen (p < 0.01), D-dimer (p < 0.01), and steroid (p = 0.01) and favipiravir (p = 0.03) administration. CONCLUSIONS: Our simple visual assessment of CT images can predict the severity of illness, a resulting decrease in respiratory function, and the need for supplemental respiratory ventilation among patients with COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/classification , COVID-19/diagnostic imaging , Tomography, X-Ray Computed , Adult , Aged , Amides/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Body Temperature , C-Reactive Protein/metabolism , COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/physiopathology , Female , Fibrin Fibrinogen Degradation Products/metabolism , Humans , L-Lactate Dehydrogenase/blood , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Lymphocyte Count , Male , Middle Aged , Mucin-1/blood , Neutrophils , Predictive Value of Tests , Prognosis , Pyrazines/therapeutic use , Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Steroids/therapeutic use
4.
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson ; 23(1): 140, 2021 12 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1590893

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Recent evidence shows an association between coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection and a severe inflammatory syndrome in children. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) data about myocardial injury in children are limited to small cohorts. The aim of this multicenter, international registry is to describe clinical and cardiac characteristics of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) associated with COVID-19 using CMR so as to better understand the real extent of myocardial damage in this vulnerable cohort. METHODS AND RESULTS: Hundred-eleven patients meeting the World Health Organization criteria for MIS-C associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), having clinical cardiac involvement and having received CMR imaging scan were included from 17 centers. Median age at disease onset was 10.0 years (IQR 7.0-13.8). The majority of children had COVID-19 serology positive (98%) with 27% of children still having both, positive serology and polymerase chain reaction (PCR). CMR was performed at a median of 28 days (19-47) after onset of symptoms. Twenty out of 111 (18%) patients had CMR criteria for acute myocarditis (as defined by the Lake Louise Criteria) with 18/20 showing subepicardial late gadolinium enhancement (LGE). CMR myocarditis was significantly associated with New York Heart Association class IV (p = 0.005, OR 6.56 (95%-CI 1.87-23.00)) and the need for mechanical support (p = 0.039, OR 4.98 (95%-CI 1.18-21.02)). At discharge, 11/111 (10%) patients still had left ventricular systolic dysfunction. CONCLUSION: No CMR evidence of myocardial damage was found in most of our MIS-C cohort. Nevertheless, acute myocarditis is a possible manifestation of MIS-C associated with SARS-CoV-2 with CMR evidence of myocardial necrosis in 18% of our cohort. CMR may be an important diagnostic tool to identify a subset of patients at risk for cardiac sequelae and more prone to myocardial damage. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study has been registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier NCT04455347, registered on 01/07/2020, retrospectively registered.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Myocarditis , COVID-19/complications , Child , Contrast Media , Gadolinium , Humans , Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy , Myocarditis/diagnostic imaging , Myocarditis/epidemiology , Predictive Value of Tests , Registries , SARS-CoV-2 , Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome
5.
J Med Internet Res ; 23(2): e23026, 2021 02 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1575588

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: For the clinical care of patients with well-established diseases, randomized trials, literature, and research are supplemented with clinical judgment to understand disease prognosis and inform treatment choices. In the void created by a lack of clinical experience with COVID-19, artificial intelligence (AI) may be an important tool to bolster clinical judgment and decision making. However, a lack of clinical data restricts the design and development of such AI tools, particularly in preparation for an impending crisis or pandemic. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop and test the feasibility of a "patients-like-me" framework to predict the deterioration of patients with COVID-19 using a retrospective cohort of patients with similar respiratory diseases. METHODS: Our framework used COVID-19-like cohorts to design and train AI models that were then validated on the COVID-19 population. The COVID-19-like cohorts included patients diagnosed with bacterial pneumonia, viral pneumonia, unspecified pneumonia, influenza, and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) at an academic medical center from 2008 to 2019. In total, 15 training cohorts were created using different combinations of the COVID-19-like cohorts with the ARDS cohort for exploratory purposes. In this study, two machine learning models were developed: one to predict invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) within 48 hours for each hospitalized day, and one to predict all-cause mortality at the time of admission. Model performance was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value. We established model interpretability by calculating SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) scores to identify important features. RESULTS: Compared to the COVID-19-like cohorts (n=16,509), the patients hospitalized with COVID-19 (n=159) were significantly younger, with a higher proportion of patients of Hispanic ethnicity, a lower proportion of patients with smoking history, and fewer patients with comorbidities (P<.001). Patients with COVID-19 had a lower IMV rate (15.1 versus 23.2, P=.02) and shorter time to IMV (2.9 versus 4.1 days, P<.001) compared to the COVID-19-like patients. In the COVID-19-like training data, the top models achieved excellent performance (AUROC>0.90). Validating in the COVID-19 cohort, the top-performing model for predicting IMV was the XGBoost model (AUROC=0.826) trained on the viral pneumonia cohort. Similarly, the XGBoost model trained on all 4 COVID-19-like cohorts without ARDS achieved the best performance (AUROC=0.928) in predicting mortality. Important predictors included demographic information (age), vital signs (oxygen saturation), and laboratory values (white blood cell count, cardiac troponin, albumin, etc). Our models had class imbalance, which resulted in high negative predictive values and low positive predictive values. CONCLUSIONS: We provided a feasible framework for modeling patient deterioration using existing data and AI technology to address data limitations during the onset of a novel, rapidly changing pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/mortality , Machine Learning , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Aged , Area Under Curve , Cohort Studies , Comorbidity , Female , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Predictive Value of Tests , Prognosis , ROC Curve , Respiration, Artificial/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
6.
Turk J Med Sci ; 51(5): 2256-2262, 2021 10 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1566691

ABSTRACT

Background/aim: Biochemical markers are needed to show lung involvement in COVID-19 disease. Galectin-3 is known to play a key role in the inflammation and fibrosis process. We aimed to evaluate the predictive role of galectin-3 levels for pneumonia in patients with COVID-19. Materials and methods: Total of 176 patients with COVID-19, confirmed with reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction, admitted to the Erzurum Regional Training and Research Hospital was analyzed. The study was designed as a cross sectional. The baseline data of laboratory examinations, including galectin-3 were collected at the time of diagnosis. CT images evaluated by a single radiologist according to the recommendation of the Radiological Society of North America Expert Consensus Document for pulmonary involvement. The severity of COVID-19 pneumonia was assessed using the total severity score. Results: The mean galectin-3 level in patients with typical pneumonia was found to be significantly higher than those patients with atypical (p < 0.01) and indeterminate appearance (p < 0.01) and patients without pneumonia (p < 0.01). The severity of lung involvement was significantly associated with Galectin-3 levels (p < 0.01 r: 0.76). Stepwise logistic regression model showed that the levels of ferritin (odds ratio [OR] = 0.05, p: 0.08) and galectin-3 (OR = 0.1, p < 0.01) were significantly and independently associated with typical pneumoniain COVID-19 patients. When COVID-19 patients were evaluated in terms of typical pneumonia, we determined a cut-off value of 18.9 ng/mL for galectin-3 via ROC analysis (87% sensitivity; 73% specificity; area under curve (AUC): 0.89; p < 0.001). Conclusion: Galectin-3 was found as a diagnostic tool for COVID-19 associated typical pneumonia and as an indicator of both pneumonia and its severity.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/complications , Galectins/blood , Pneumonia, Viral/blood , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Aged , Biomarkers/blood , Blood Proteins , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Predictive Value of Tests
7.
Pan Afr Med J ; 39: 228, 2021.
Article in French | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1551883

ABSTRACT

Introduction: the COVID-19 pandemic causes biological diagnostic problems that remain relevant in low-income countries in general and in Cameroon in particular. Rapids tests that reliably detect SARS-CoV-2 virus antigen present themselves as an important alternative in several contexts. The objective of our study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of two rapid diagnostic tests BIOSYNEX® COVID-19 Ag BSS and BIOSYNEX® COVID-19 Ag + BSS, compared to each other and to the AmpliQuick® SARS-CoV-2 PCR test. Methods: a cross-sectional and comparative study was carried out from April 27 to May 29, 2021 in the city of Douala in Cameroon. The samples consisted of nasopharyngeal swabs received at the molecular biology laboratory of the Douala Gyneco-obstetric and pediatric hospital, whatever their origin. The socio-demographic parameters (age, profession, football players, travelers, others), marital status, nationality), comorbidity and known status of COVID-19, were recorded on the collection sites. The main collection sites were the Deïdo Health District and the Douala Gyneco-Obstetric and Pediatric Hospital. We performed the diagnosis of COVID-19 using the rapid diagnostic test (RDT) BIOSYNEX® COVID-19 Ag BSS and RDT BIOSYNEX® COVID-19 Ag + BSS compared to each other and to the AmpliQuick® SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test on each sample. Statistical analysis of the data was performed using Microsoft Excel and SPSS version 17 software. To determine the sensitivity of the two RDTs, the Bayesian latent class model was performed on the median with a 95% confidence interval with p<0.05 as the significant level. An ethical clearance was sought and obtained from the University of Douala Institutional Ethics Committee. Results: a total of 1813 participants were included in our study, with a predominance of men (1226, 68.68 %) and the most represented age group was that of 31 to 40 years (568, 31.33 %). Most of the participants were married (888, 53.46%) and only a few had a known COVID-19 status (75, 5.47%). The two rapid tests on our study population show much closed COVID-19 prevalence values, respectively 2.03 for BIOSYNEX® COVID-19 Ag BSS and 2.17 for BIOSYNEX® COVID-19 Ag + BSS. RDT BIOSYNEX® COVID-19 Ag + BSS showed higher sensitivity 94.1% vs. 87.5% for RDT BIOSYNEX® COVID-19 Ag BSS with almost identical specificity 98.9% for RDT BIOSYNEX® COVID-19 Ag + BSS vs. 98.7% for RDT BIOSYNEX® COVID-19 Ag BSS compared to AmpliQuick® SARS-CoV-2. BIOSYNEX® COVID-19 Ag + BSS RDT showed a negative predictive value of 99.9% compared to BIOSYNEX® COVID-19 Ag BSS RDT. There is a 99.9% agreement between the RDT BIOSYNEX® COVID-19 Ag BSS and the RDT BIOSYNEX® COVID-19 Ag + BSS. Conclusion: the RDT BIOSYNEX®COVID-19 Ag + BSS and RDT BIOSYNEX® COVID-19 Ag BSS can be used for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 and can have an important contribution in the context of mass screenings and screening in remote areas.


Subject(s)
Antigens, Viral/analysis , COVID-19 Testing/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , Polymerase Chain Reaction/methods , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Cameroon , Child , Child, Preschool , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Male , Middle Aged , Predictive Value of Tests , SARS-CoV-2 , Sensitivity and Specificity , Young Adult
8.
J Nippon Med Sch ; 88(4): 380-383, 2021 Sep 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1551292

ABSTRACT

We assessed the association of severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) load, IgG antibody level, and prognostic indicators.Twenty-one patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were classified as having severe or mild disease on the basis of average respiratory rate during hospitalization (severe: ≥22 breaths/min; mild: <22 breaths/min). Viral load in nasopharyngeal samples, blood levels of C-reactive protein (CRP), lymphocytes, and D-dimer on admission and plasma immunoglobulin G (IgG) index on Day 7±2 after symptom onset were compared in relation to disease severity. Seven patients had severe disease and 14 had mild disease. Those with severe disease had a significantly higher IgG index (median: 3.75 vs 0.56, p=0.01) and CRP (median: 8.6 vs 1.0 mg/dL, p<0.001) and D-dimer levels (median: 1.65 vs 0.75 µg/mL; p=0.002) and a significantly lower lymphocyte count (median: 1,176 vs 666 cells/µL, p=0.005) and viral load (median: 8.7×106 vs 2.3×104 copies/mL, p=0.005). Furthermore, time from symptom onset to virus disappearance was significantly longer in severe patients (median: 24 vs 17 days, p=0.03). A high IgG index in the early phase of the disease was associated with severe disease and might serve as a prognostic indicator.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing , COVID-19 Serological Testing , COVID-19/diagnosis , Immunoglobulin G/blood , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Viral Load , Adult , Aged , Biomarkers/blood , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/therapy , COVID-19/virology , Female , Hospitalization , Host-Pathogen Interactions , Humans , Japan , Male , Middle Aged , Oxygen Inhalation Therapy , Predictive Value of Tests , Prognosis , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Severity of Illness Index , Time Factors
9.
Clin Lab ; 67(12)2021 Dec 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1551832

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Despite increasing COVID-19 infection rates, low overall prevalence resulting in a poor positive predictive value (PPV) of serological tests requires strategies to increase specificity. We therefore investigated a dual diagnostic strategy and evaluated the correlation between the severity of a SARS-CoV-2 infection and the detectable immune-response. METHODS: Participants were systematically categorized into positive and control cohorts and a probability score of COVID-19 was calculated based on clinical symptoms. Six hundred eighty-two serum samples were analyzed using a highly specific high-throughput system. Combining the serological test result and probability score was performed as a dual diagnostic strategy. RESULTS: Specificity of 99.61% and sensitivity of 86.0% were the basis of our approach. A dual diagnostic strategy led to increased pre-test probability and thus to a test specificity of 100%. In a flu-like symptomatic population, we estimated a COVID-prevalence of 4.79%. Moreover, we detected significantly higher antibody values in patients with fever than without fever. CONCLUSIONS: Based on sensitivity and specificity results of our study being in line with previous findings, we demonstrated a dual assessment strategy including a symptom-based probability score and serological testing to increase the PPV. Moreover, the presence of fever seems to trigger a stronger immune-response.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Antibodies, Viral , Humans , Predictive Value of Tests , Sensitivity and Specificity
10.
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol ; 16(11): 1755-1765, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1526737

ABSTRACT

Despite evidence of multiorgan tropism of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), direct viral kidney invasion has been difficult to demonstrate. The question of whether SARS-CoV2 can directly infect the kidney is relevant to the understanding of pathogenesis of AKI and collapsing glomerulopathy in patients with COVID-19. Methodologies to document SARS-CoV-2 infection that have been used include immunohistochemistry, immunofluorescence, RT-PCR, in situ hybridization, and electron microscopy. In our review of studies to date, we found that SARS-CoV-2 in the kidneys of patients with COVID-19 was detected in 18 of 94 (19%) by immunohistochemistry, 71 of 144 (49%) by RT-PCR, and 11 of 84 (13%) by in situ hybridization. In a smaller number of patients with COVID-19 examined by immunofluorescence, SARS-CoV-2 was detected in 10 of 13 (77%). In total, in kidneys from 102 of 235 patients (43%), the presence of SARS-CoV-2 was suggested by at least one of the methods used. Despite these positive findings, caution is needed because many other studies have been negative for SARS-CoV-2 and it should be noted that when detected, it was only in kidneys obtained at autopsy. There is a clear need for studies from kidney biopsies, including those performed at early stages of the COVID-19-associated kidney disease. Development of tests to detect kidney viral infection in urine samples would be more practical as a noninvasive way to evaluate SARS-CoV-2 infection during the evolution of COVID-19-associated kidney disease.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/virology , Kidney Diseases/virology , Kidney/virology , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Animals , Biopsy , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19 Testing , Host-Pathogen Interactions , Humans , Kidney Diseases/diagnosis , Kidney Diseases/mortality , Predictive Value of Tests , Prognosis , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors
11.
J Clin Pathol ; 74(12): 804-807, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1526517

ABSTRACT

AIMS: This short study was performed to better understand the time frame associated with changes in SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid testing and provide recommendations for repeat testing. Recommendations are useful as little guidance is available for repeat testing in patients being followed expectantly for changes in disease. METHODS: A review of laboratory data of tests for SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid was performed selecting patients who had changing results. Time between changes in test results was determined to provide guidance for repeat testing. RESULTS: The Interquartile Range (IQR) of data for patients who had a negative to positive change in laboratory testing (progression) was 6-16 days (median=9 days). The IQR of data for patients who had a positive to negative change in test results (remission) was 9-21 days (median=14 days). CONCLUSION: Because sampling of the nares or nasopharynx can be variable, repeat testing should be performed swiftly when symptomatic patients are negative. The data in this short study vary widely, so authors recommend repeat testing during a period of time associated with the IQR or median (see results above).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing , COVID-19/diagnosis , Nasopharynx/virology , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , COVID-19/therapy , COVID-19/virology , Disease Progression , False Negative Reactions , False Positive Reactions , Humans , Predictive Value of Tests , Remission Induction , Reproducibility of Results , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
12.
mSphere ; 6(5): e0075221, 2021 10 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1526451

ABSTRACT

During the progression of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), immune response and inflammation reactions are dynamic events that develop rapidly and are associated with the severity of disease. Here, we aimed to develop a predictive model based on the immune and inflammatory response to discriminate patients with severe COVID-19. COVID-19 patients were enrolled, and their demographic and immune inflammatory reaction indicators were collected and analyzed. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the independent predictors, which were further used to construct a predictive model. The predictive performance of the model was evaluated by receiver operating characteristic curve, and optimal diagnostic threshold was calculated; these were further validated by 5-fold cross-validation and external validation. We screened three key indicators, including neutrophils, eosinophils, and IgA, for predicting severe COVID-19 and obtained a combined neutrophil, eosinophil, and IgA ratio (NEAR) model (NEU [109/liter] - 150×EOS [109/liter] + 3×IgA [g/liter]). NEAR achieved an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.961, and when a threshold of 9 was applied, the sensitivity and specificity of the predicting model were 100% and 88.89%, respectively. Thus, NEAR is an effective index for predicting the severity of COVID-19 and can be used as a powerful tool for clinicians to make better clinical decisions. IMPORTANCE The immune inflammatory response changes rapidly with the progression of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and is responsible for clearance of the virus and further recovery from the infection. However, the intensified immune and inflammatory response in the development of the disease may lead to more serious and fatal consequences, which indicates that immune indicators have the potential to predict serious cases. Here, we identified both eosinophils and serum IgA as prognostic markers of COVID-19, which sheds light on new research directions and is worthy of further research in the scientific research field as well as clinical application. In this study, the combination of NEU count, EOS count, and IgA level was included in a new predictive model of the severity of COVID-19, which can be used as a powerful tool for better clinical decision-making.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/immunology , Clinical Decision Rules , Severity of Illness Index , Adult , Aged , Biomarkers/blood , COVID-19/blood , Clinical Decision-Making/methods , Disease Progression , Eosinophils/metabolism , Female , Humans , Immunoglobulin A/blood , Inflammation/blood , Inflammation/diagnosis , Inflammation/virology , Logistic Models , Male , Middle Aged , Neutrophils/metabolism , Predictive Value of Tests , Prognosis , Sensitivity and Specificity
13.
Int J Cardiovasc Imaging ; 37(12): 3499-3512, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1525551

ABSTRACT

Cardiac involvement has been frequently reported in COVID-19 as responsible of increased morbidity and mortality. Given the importance of right heart function in acute and chronic respiratory diseases, its assessment in SARS-CoV-2 infected patients may add prognostic accuracy. Transthoracic echocardiography has been proposed to early predict myocardial injury and risk of death in hospitalized patients. This systematic review presents the up-to-date sum of literature regarding right ventricle ultrasound assessment. We evaluated commonly used echocardiographic parameters to assess RV function and discussed their relationship with pathophysiological mechanisms involved in COVID-19. We searched Medline and Embase for studies that used transthoracic echocardiography for right ventricle assessment in patients with COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Ventricular Dysfunction, Right , Echocardiography , Heart Ventricles/diagnostic imaging , Humans , Predictive Value of Tests , SARS-CoV-2 , Ventricular Dysfunction, Right/diagnostic imaging , Ventricular Dysfunction, Right/etiology
14.
Int J Cardiovasc Imaging ; 37(12): 3459-3467, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1525550

ABSTRACT

In patients hospitalized for corona virus infectious disease 19 (COVID-19) it is currently unknown whether myocardial function changes after recovery and whether this is related to elevated cardiac biomarkers. In this single center, prospective cohort study we consecutively enrolled hospitalized COVID-19 patients between 1 April and 12 May 2020. All patients underwent transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) evaluation during hospitalization and at a median of 131 days (IQR; 116-136) follow-up. Of the 51 patients included at baseline, 40 (age: 62 years (IQR; 54-68), 78% male) were available for follow-up TTE. At baseline, 68% of the patients had a normal TTE, regarding left ventricular (LV) and right ventricular (RV) volumes and function, compared to 83% at follow-up (p = 0.07). Median LV ejection fraction (60% vs. 58%, p = 0.54) and tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (23 vs 22 mm, p = 0.18) were comparable between hospitalization and follow-up, but a significantly lower RV diameter (39 vs. 34 mm, p = 0.002) and trend towards better global longitudinal strain (GLS) (- 18.5% vs - 19.1%, p = 0.07) was found at follow-up. Subgroup analysis showed no relation between patients with and without elevated TroponinT and/or NT-proBNP during hospitalization and myocardial function at follow-up. Although there were no significant differences in individual myocardial function parameters at 4 months follow-up compared to hospitalisation for COVID-19, there was an overall trend towards normalization in myocardial function, predominantly due to a higher rate of normal GLS at follow-up.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Communicable Diseases , Echocardiography , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Hospitalization , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Predictive Value of Tests , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Stroke Volume
15.
Int J Cardiovasc Imaging ; 37(12): 3451-3457, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1525549

ABSTRACT

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a newly recognized infectious disease that has spread rapidly. COVID-19 has been associated with a number of cardiovascular involvements, including ventricular functions. The aim of our study was to evaluate the right ventricular functions of mild severity COVID-19 patients 3 months after, and compare them to the right ventricular functions of healthy volunteers. For this single-center study, data from 105 patients who were treated for mild severity COVID-19 between September 15, 2020 and December 31, 2020 were collected. 105 age and sex matched healthy subjects were included in the study. Right ventricular (RV) functions were evaluated using conventional two-dimensional (2D) echocardiography and 2D speckle-tracking echocardiography (STE) for all patients. 2D-E parameters indicating RV functions were compared between the two groups. RV diamaters, systolic pulmonary artery pressure (sPAP) and RV myocardial performance index (RV MPI) were significantly higher in the COVID-19 patients compared to control group (p < 0.05). Tricuspid annular plane systolic motion (TAPSE), right ventricular fractional area change (RVFAC) and RV S' were significantly lower in the COVID-19 group compared to control group (p < 0.05). RV global longitudinal strain (RV-GLS) (- 19.6 ± 5.2 vs. - 15.1 ± 3.4, p < 0.001) and RV free wall longitudinal strain RV-FWLS (- 19.6 ± 5.2 vs. - 17.2 ± 4.4, p < 0.001) values were significantly lower in the COVID-19 group than the control group. There was a significant negative correlation between RV-FWLS, RV-GLS and C-reactive protein (CRP), neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR), d-dimer, ferritin, platelet to lymphocyte ratio (PLR) in patients with mild severity COVID-19. This results suggested that RV-GLS and RV-FWLS decreased in the long term (third month) follow-up of patients treated for mild severity COVID-19 disease. Subclinical RV dysfunction may be observed in patients after mild severity COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Ventricular Dysfunction, Right , Humans , Predictive Value of Tests , SARS-CoV-2 , Ventricular Dysfunction, Right/diagnostic imaging , Ventricular Dysfunction, Right/etiology , Ventricular Function, Right
16.
Saudi Med J ; 42(4): 370-376, 2021 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1513257

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To assess the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) diagnostic and prognostic value in the context of Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) infection in Saudi Arabia. METHODS: A case-control study in which 701 confirmed COVID-19 patients (of which 41 were intensive care unit [ICU]-admitted) and 250 control subjects were enrolled. The study was conducted retrospectively in October on patients admitted to 3 separate hospitals in Saudi Arabia namely: King Abdullah Bin Abdulaziz University Hospital (Riyadh), Ohud Hospital (Madinah), and Nojood Medical Center (Madinah) between May and September 2020. Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio was calculated based on absolute neutrophil and lymphocyte count. Institutional ethical approval was obtained prior to the study. RESULTS: Patients (median age 35 years), of which 54.8% were females, were younger than the control cohort (median age 48 years). Patients had significantly higher NLR compared to the control group. Intensive care unit admitted patients had significantly higher platelet, WBC and neutrophil counts. The ICU patients' NLR was almost twice as of the non-intensive patients. The NLR value of 5.5 was found to be of high specificity (96.4%) and positive predictive value (91.4%) in diagnosing COVID-19. Furthermore, it had a very good sensitivity (86.4%) in predicting severe forms of disease, such as, ICU admission. CONCLUSION: Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio is an important tool in determining the COVID-19 clinical status. This study further confirms the prognostic value of NLR in detecting severe infection, and those patients with high NLR should be closely monitored and managed.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , Lymphocyte Count , Neutrophils , Adult , Blood Cell Count , COVID-19/blood , Case-Control Studies , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Leukocyte Count , Male , Middle Aged , Platelet Count , Predictive Value of Tests , Prognosis , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Saudi Arabia , Sensitivity and Specificity , Severity of Illness Index
19.
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord ; 9(3): 605-614.e2, 2021 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1510080

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Early reports suggest that patients with novel coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) infection carry a significant risk of altered coagulation with an increased risk for venous thromboembolic events. This report investigates the relationship of significant COVID-19 infection and deep venous thrombosis (DVT) as reflected in the patient clinical and laboratory characteristics. METHODS: We reviewed the demographics, clinical presentation, laboratory and radiologic evaluations, results of venous duplex imaging and mortality of COVID-19-positive patients (18-89 years) admitted to the Indiana University Academic Health Center. Using oxygen saturation, radiologic findings, and need for advanced respiratory therapies, patients were classified into mild, moderate, or severe categories of COVID-19 infection. A descriptive analysis was performed using univariate and bivariate Fisher's exact and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests to examine the distribution of patient characteristics and compare the DVT outcomes. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to estimate the adjusted odds ratio of experiencing DVT and a receiver operating curve analysis to identify the optimal cutoff for d-dimer to predict DVT in this COVID-19 cohort. Time to the diagnosis of DVT from admission was analyzed using log-rank test and Kaplan-Meier plots. RESULTS: Our study included 71 unique COVID-19-positive patients (mean age, 61 years) categorized as having 3% mild, 14% moderate, and 83% severe infection and evaluated with 107 venous duplex studies. DVT was identified in 47.8% of patients (37% of examinations) at an average of 5.9 days after admission. Patients with DVT were predominantly male (67%; P = .032) with proximal venous involvement (29% upper and 39% in the lower extremities with 55% of the latter demonstrating bilateral involvement). Patients with DVT had a significantly higher mean d-dimer of 5447 ± 7032 ng/mL (P = .0101), and alkaline phosphatase of 110 IU/L (P = .0095) than those without DVT. On multivariable analysis, elevated d-dimer (P = .038) and alkaline phosphatase (P = .021) were associated with risk for DVT, whereas age, sex, elevated C-reactive protein, and ferritin levels were not. A receiver operating curve analysis suggests an optimal d-dimer value of 2450 ng/mL cutoff with 70% sensitivity, 59.5% specificity, and 61% positive predictive value, and 68.8% negative predictive value. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that males with severe COVID-19 infection requiring hospitalization are at highest risk for developing DVT. Elevated d-dimers and alkaline phosphatase along with our multivariable model can alert the clinician to the increased risk of DVT requiring early evaluation and aggressive treatment.


Subject(s)
Alkaline Phosphatase/blood , COVID-19 , Extremities , Fibrin Fibrinogen Degradation Products/analysis , Risk Assessment/methods , Ultrasonography, Doppler, Duplex , Venous Thrombosis , Anticoagulants/administration & dosage , Biomarkers/blood , Blood Coagulation , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/therapy , Early Diagnosis , Extremities/blood supply , Extremities/diagnostic imaging , Female , Humans , Indiana/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Predictive Value of Tests , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Time-to-Treatment/statistics & numerical data , Ultrasonography, Doppler, Duplex/methods , Ultrasonography, Doppler, Duplex/statistics & numerical data , Venous Thrombosis/diagnosis , Venous Thrombosis/drug therapy , Venous Thrombosis/etiology , Venous Thrombosis/prevention & control
20.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 21807, 2021 11 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1506761

ABSTRACT

In this study, we compare the predictive value of clinical scoring systems that are already in use in patients with Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), including the Brescia-COVID Respiratory Severity Scale (BCRSS), Quick SOFA (qSOFA), Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA), Multilobular infiltration, hypo-Lymphocytosis, Bacterial coinfection, Smoking history, hyper-Tension, and Age (MuLBSTA) and scoring system for reactive hemophagocytic syndrome (HScore), for determining the severity of the disease. Our aim in this study is to determine which scoring system is most useful in determining disease severity and to guide clinicians. We classified the patients into two groups according to the stage of the disease (severe and non-severe) and adopted interim guidance of the World Health Organization. Severe cases were divided into a group of surviving patients and a deceased group according to the prognosis. According to admission values, the BCRSS, qSOFA, SOFA, MuLBSTA, and HScore were evaluated at admission using the worst parameters available in the first 24 h. Of the 417 patients included in our study, 46 (11%) were in the severe group, while 371 (89%) were in the non-severe group. Of these 417 patients, 230 (55.2%) were men. The median (IQR) age of all patients was 44 (25) years. In multivariate logistic regression analyses, BRCSS in the highest tertile (HR 6.1, 95% CI 2.105-17.674, p = 0.001) was determined as an independent predictor of severe disease in cases of COVID-19. In multivariate analyses, qSOFA was also found to be an independent predictor of severe COVID-19 (HR 4.757, 95% CI 1.438-15.730, p = 0.011). The area under the curve (AUC) of the BRCSS, qSOFA, SOFA, MuLBSTA, and HScore was 0.977, 0.961, 0.958, 0.860, and 0.698, respectively. Calculation of the BRCSS and qSOFA at the time of hospital admission can predict critical clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19, and their predictive value is superior to that of HScore, MuLBSTA, and SOFA. Our prediction is that early interventions for high-risk patients, with early identification of high-risk group using BRCSS and qSOFA, may improve clinical outcomes in COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/immunology , Adult , Aged , Area Under Curve , Coinfection/diagnosis , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Lymphocytosis , Male , Middle Aged , Observer Variation , Organ Dysfunction Scores , Patient Admission , Predictive Value of Tests , Prognosis , Regression Analysis , Respiration , Respiration Disorders , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index , Smoking , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...