Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 86
Filter
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
3.
Pharmacol Res Perspect ; 9(6): e00861, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1487514

ABSTRACT

Most but not all observational studies of statin treatment of COVID-19 patients suggest that treatment improves outcomes. However, almost all of these studies fail to consider that withdrawing statins after hospital admission may have detrimental effects, a finding which cardiovascular investigators have known for 15-20 years. Continuing or starting statin treatment after hospital admission consistently improves cardiovascular outcomes. Similarly, inpatient statin treatment of COVID-19 improves survival. For this reason, observational studies of the effectiveness of outpatient-documented statin treatment of COVID-19 patients must consider the negative consequences of statin withdrawal after hospital admission.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/drug therapy , Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Meta-Analysis as Topic , Observational Studies as Topic , Patient Admission , Treatment Outcome , Withholding Treatment
5.
J Med Ethics ; 46(8): 495-498, 2020 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1467727

ABSTRACT

Key ethical challenges for healthcare workers arising from the COVID-19 pandemic are identified: isolation and social distancing, duty of care and fair access to treatment. The paper argues for a relational approach to ethics which includes solidarity, relational autonomy, duty, equity, trust and reciprocity as core values. The needs of the poor and socially disadvantaged are highlighted. Relational autonomy and solidarity are explored in relation to isolation and social distancing. Reciprocity is discussed with reference to healthcare workers' duty of care and its limits. Priority setting and access to treatment raise ethical issues of utility and equity. Difficult ethical dilemmas around triage, do not resuscitate decisions, and withholding and withdrawing treatment are discussed in the light of recently published guidelines. The paper concludes with the hope for a wider discussion of relational ethics and a glimpse of a future after the pandemic has subsided.


Subject(s)
Decision Making/ethics , Ethics, Clinical , Health Care Rationing/ethics , Health Equity/ethics , Health Personnel/ethics , Pandemics/ethics , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Disaster Planning , Humans , Moral Obligations , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Poverty , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Professional-Patient Relations , Resuscitation Orders , SARS-CoV-2 , Social Values , Triage/ethics , Vulnerable Populations , Withholding Treatment/ethics
7.
Adv Rheumatol ; 61(1): 55, 2021 09 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1388847

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Anti-rheumatic drugs can increase the predisposition to infection, and patients may be unaware of continuing their treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess whether patients maintain their treatment for rheumatic conditions during the pandemic period and determine the factors responsible for discontinuation. METHODS: Patients were randomly selected from the prospectively collected database of our tertiary referral center. The patients were interviewed by telephone through a standardized closed-ended questionnaire, which is targeting the continuity of the treatment plan and the considerations related to the individual choice. The patients were asked whether they hesitated to visit the hospital for follow-up or intravenous drug administration. RESULTS: A total of 278 patients completed the questionnaire. While 62 of the patients (22.3%) had reduced or interrupted the treatment, only 11 patients (3.9%) stopped the treatment completely. A significant difference was observed between the duration of illness and the discontinuation of treatment. (p = 0.023) There was a significant difference in disease activity between the group that stopped treatment and continued treatment. (p = 0.001) There was no statistically significant difference in other demographic characteristics. One hundred thirty-five patients (48.6%) made the treatment decision by themselves, and 80% continued the treatment. Reasons for stopping the treatment were anxiety (48.4%), not being able to go to the hospital for intravenous treatment (45.1%), and not being able to find the drug (6.5%). CONCLUSION: Since patients with long-term illnesses were found to be significantly more likely to stop their treatment, this group of patients should be monitored.


Subject(s)
Antirheumatic Agents/therapeutic use , Attitude to Health , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , Rheumatic Diseases/drug therapy , Withholding Treatment/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Aged , Antirheumatic Agents/supply & distribution , Anxiety , Continuity of Patient Care , Databases, Factual , Decision Making , Female , Health Services Accessibility , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Rheumatic Diseases/psychology , Surveys and Questionnaires/statistics & numerical data , Tertiary Care Centers , Young Adult
8.
J Cancer Res Clin Oncol ; 147(5): 1469-1479, 2021 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1384445

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The severe acute respiratory syndrome-2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic disrupted medical care for persons with cancer including those with lymphoma. Many professional societies recommend postponing, decreasing, or stopping anti-cancer therapy in selected persons during the pandemic. Although seemingly sensible, these recommendations are not evidence-based and their impact on anxiety and health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) is unknown. METHODS: We surveyed 2532 subjects including 1060 persons with lymphoma, 948 caregivers, and 524 normals using a purposed-designed questionnaire on a patient organization website. Respondents also completed the Zung Self-Rating Anxiety and patient respondents, the EORTC QLQ-C30 instruments to quantify anxiety, and HRQoL. We also evaluated caregiver support and an online education programme of the Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO). Data of HRQoL from a 2019 pre-pandemic online survey of 1106 persons with lymphoma were a control. RESULTS: 33% (95% confidence interval [CI] 30, 36%) of lymphoma patients and 31% (28, 34%) of caregivers but only 21% (17, 24%) of normals had any level of anxiety (both pair-wise P < 0.001). Among lymphoma respondents, physical exercise and better caregiver support were associated with less anxiety, whereas female sex, receiving therapy, and reduced therapy intensity were associated with more anxiety. Paradoxically, lymphoma respondents during the pandemic had better HRQoL than pre-pandemic controls. Reduced therapy intensity was associated with worse HRQoL, whereas respondents who scored caregiver support and the online patient education programme high had better HRQoL. CONCLUSION: During the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, lymphoma patients and their caregivers had significantly higher incidences of anxiety compared with normals. Lymphoma respondents reported better HRQoL compared with pre-pandemic controls. Reduced therapy intensity in persons with cancer may have unanticipated adverse effects on anxiety and HRQoL. Regular and intense support by caregivers and online education programmes alleviate anxiety and improve HRQoL.


Subject(s)
Anxiety/epidemiology , COVID-19/psychology , Lymphoma/therapy , Quality of Life/psychology , Withholding Treatment/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , Caregivers/psychology , Depression/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Internet , Lymphoma/psychology , Male , Middle Aged , Psychosocial Support Systems , Risk , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires , Young Adult
9.
J Bioeth Inq ; 17(4): 783-787, 2020 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1384576

ABSTRACT

Although one can argue that they do not represent a radical departure from existing practices, protocols for reverse triage certainly step beyond what is ordinarily done in medicine and healthcare. Nevertheless, there seems to be some degree of moral concern regarding the ethical legitimacy of practicing reverse triage in the context of a pandemic. Such concern can be taken as a reflection of the moral antipathy some exhibit towards current practices of withdrawing treatment-that is, when withdrawal of treatment is arguably in the best interests of patients-and a rejection of the purported normative insignificance of withholding and withdrawing. Given that the relevance of the psychological attitudes of some healthcare professionals to the moral assessment of withdrawing and withholding treatment continues to be debated, it would seem that some thought should be given to the introduction and implementation of reverse triage decisions in response to a pandemic. This brief paper will consider if provision should be made for healthcare professionals to conscientiously refuse to participate in reverse triage.


Subject(s)
Decision Making , Triage , Withholding Treatment/ethics , COVID-19/therapy , Humans , Pandemics
11.
Int J Gynecol Cancer ; 31(10): 1363-1368, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1370903

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: COVID-19 is a global public health emergency. The increasing spread of COVID-19 presents challenges for the clinical care of patients with gynecological tumors. The Multicenter Italian Trials in Ovarian cancer and gynecologic malignancies (MITO) performed a survey to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on medical treatment of gynecological cancer, with a focus on chemotherapy and oral treatment with poly(ADP)-ribose polymerase inhibitors (PARP-i). METHODS: The survey consisted of a self-administered online questionnaire, sent via email between November 2020 and January 2021 to all members of MITO group. RESULTS: Forty-nine centers completed the questionnaire. The majority of respondents (83%) use screening tests to determine COVID-19 status in patients who were to undergo chemotherapy or oral medications. All respondents to our survey continued cancer therapy in patients who tested negative for COVID-19 during the pandemic. Seventy-three percent of respondents declared they stopped treatment with chemotherapy or PARP-i only after a positive swab and resumed therapy when negative tests were confirmed. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 positivity impacted patterns of treatment in patients diagnosed with ovarian cancer within the MITO group. Further investigations are needed to evaluate whether these modifications influence oncological clinical outcomes.


Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19 Testing/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/diagnosis , Genital Neoplasms, Female/drug therapy , Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Withholding Treatment/statistics & numerical data , Administration, Oral , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/prevention & control , Female , Genital Neoplasms, Female/complications , Health Care Surveys , Health Services Accessibility/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Italy , Male , Middle Aged
12.
Turk J Gastroenterol ; 32(6): 488-492, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1362707

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, has resulted in high mortality and morbidity worldwide and is still a growing problem. Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a chronic inflammatory disease for which a substantial number of patients are treated with immunosuppressive medications, either occasionally or long-term. Despite the accumulating evidence, there is still a lack of knowledge about the impact of COVID-19 on IBD patients, especially those who are under immunosuppressive treatment. Moreover, following the emergence of several COVID vaccines, there are concerns regarding vaccine effectiveness and possible side effects in such patients. In this context, we tried to briefly summarize the accumulating evidence and recommendations for the management of IBD in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/immunology , Immunocompromised Host , Immunosuppressive Agents/therapeutic use , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases/drug therapy , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases/immunology , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/therapy , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , Drug Administration Schedule , Humans , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases/complications , Prognosis , Risk Factors , Withholding Treatment
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.
Cancer ; 127(21): 4072-4080, 2021 11 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1320064

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: As the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to spread, it remains unclear how vulnerable populations with preexisting health conditions like cancer have been affected. METHODS: Between July and September of 2020, the authors conducted a cross-sectional study that surveyed 2661 patients with breast cancer who were registered in the Chicago Multiethnic Epidemiologic Breast Cancer Cohort and received 1300 responses (71.5% White patients and 22.4% Black patients). The survey measured the psychosocial well-being of participants before and during the COVID-19 pandemic and examined whether they experienced any type of financial challenges or treatment disruption. RESULTS: The results indicated that feelings of isolation increased significantly during the pandemic. Meanwhile, the overall median isolation/stress score was 1.2 on a scale from 0 (never) to 4 (always), which was not significantly different between White patients and Black patients. One-third of patients experienced some type of financial challenge during this time. Medicaid recipients, of whom almost 80% were Black, were more likely to experience financial challenges. In addition, approximately one-fourth of patients experienced difficulty getting treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that the quality of life of patients with breast cancer and their scheduled treatments have been adversely affected during the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings suggest that more support should be provided by hospital centers and the medical research community to patients with cancer during this challenging pandemic. LAY SUMMARY: The authors surveyed patients with breast cancer in Chicago using a questionnaire to examine how their lives have been affected during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The results indicate that the lives of patients with breast cancer and their scheduled treatments have been adversely affected during the pandemic. In addition, patients who were covered by Medicaid, most of whom were Black, were more likely to experience financial challenges. The findings suggest that hospital centers and the medical research community should reach out and provide more information to support patients with cancer during this challenging pandemic.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/therapy , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , Quality of Life , Withholding Treatment , Aged , /statistics & numerical data , Breast Neoplasms/ethnology , Chicago/epidemiology , Chicago/ethnology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Financial Stress/epidemiology , Financial Stress/ethnology , Health Services Accessibility/statistics & numerical data , Health Surveys/statistics & numerical data , Healthcare Disparities/ethnology , Healthcare Disparities/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Medicare/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Prevalence , Social Isolation/psychology , United States , /statistics & numerical data
16.
Eur J Med Res ; 26(1): 62, 2021 Jun 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1285187

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Differential diagnosis of interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) during the COVID-19 pandemic is difficult, due to similarities in clinical and radiological presentation between COVID-19 and other ILDs on the one hand, and frequent false-negative swab results on the other. We describe a rare form of interstitial and organizing pneumonia resembling COVID-19, emphasizing some key aspects to focus on to get the right diagnosis and treat the patient properly. CASE PRESENTATION: A 76-year-old man presented with short breath and dry cough in the midst of the COVID-19 outbreak. He showed bilateral crackles and interstitial-alveolar opacities on X-ray, corresponding on computed tomography (CT) to extensive consolidations with air bronchograms, surrounded by ground glass opacities (GGO). Although his throat-and-nasopharyngeal swab tested negative, the picture was overall compatible with COVID-19. On the other hand, he showed subacute, rather than hyperacute, clinical onset; few and stable parenchymal consolidations, rather than patchy and rapidly evolving GGO; pleural and pericardial thickening, pleural effusion, and lymph node enlargement, usually absent in COVID-19; and peripheral eosinophilia, rather than lymphopenia, suggestive of hypersensitivity. In the past year, he had been taking amiodarone for a history of ventricular ectopic beats. CT scans, in fact, highlighted hyperattenuation areas suggestive of amiodarone pulmonary accumulation and toxicity. Bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) investigation confirmed the absence of coronavirus genome in the lower respiratory tract; conversely, high numbers of foamy macrophages, eosinophils, and cytotoxic T lymphocytes with low CD4/CD8 T-cell ratio were detected, confirming the hypothesis of amiodarone-induced cryptogenic organizing pneumonia. Timely discontinuation of amiodarone and initiation of steroid therapy led to resolution of respiratory symptoms, systemic inflammation, and radiographic opacities. CONCLUSIONS: A comprehensive analysis of medical and pharmacological history, clinical onset, radiologic details, and peripheral and BALF cellularity, is required for a correct differential diagnosis and management of ILDs in the COVID-19 era.


Subject(s)
Amiodarone/adverse effects , COVID-19/diagnosis , Cryptogenic Organizing Pneumonia/diagnosis , Ventricular Premature Complexes/drug therapy , Withholding Treatment/statistics & numerical data , Aged , COVID-19/virology , Cryptogenic Organizing Pneumonia/chemically induced , Cryptogenic Organizing Pneumonia/prevention & control , Diagnosis, Differential , Humans , Male , Prognosis , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Tomography, X-Ray Computed
17.
Soins ; 66(855): 26-29, 2021 May.
Article in French | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1261961

ABSTRACT

The covid-19 epidemic and the resulting lockdown measures have undoubtedly led people who are ill, as well as those at risk of becoming ill, to contemplate the notions of risk, uncertainty and death. What effects has this confrontation with the question of death had and what impact will it continue to have on the palliative care approach and the decisions to withhold and withdraw treatment in certain circumstances?


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Communicable Disease Control , Death , Decision Making , Humans , Palliative Care , SARS-CoV-2 , Withholding Treatment
18.
Cir Cir ; 89(3): 390-393, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1244414

ABSTRACT

Posponer cirugías electivas durante el proceso pandémico de Covid-19 aumentó el riesgo de complicaciones graves de enfermedades benignas. El íleo biliar es una de las raras complicaciones de la colelitiasis (0,3-0,5%). Los episodios recurrentes de colecistitis aguda están involucrados en la fisiopatología. La demostración de la tríada de Rigler en tomografía computarizada es diagnóstica. Para reducir la morbilidad se recomienda la cirugía dos etapas: extirpar el cálculo por enterotomía en la primera operación, cirugía biliar en la segunda operación. El íleo biliar debe estar en el diagnóstico diferencial de las obstrucciones intestinales mecánicas, especialmente en pacientes con antecedentes de ataques de colecistitis durante el proceso pandémico de Covid-19 porque las cirugías electivas se detuvieron.Postponing elective surgeries during the coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic process increased the risk of severe complications of benign diseases. Gallstone ileus is one of the rare complications of cholelithiasis (0.3-0.5%). Recurrent episodes of acute cholecystitis are involved in pathophysiology. Demonstration of Rigler's triad on computed tomography is diagnostic. To reduce morbidity stepped surgery is recommended: remove the stone by enterotomy at the first operation and biliary surgery at the second operation. Gallstone ileus should be in the differential diagnosis of mechanical intestinal obstructions, especially in patients with a history of cholecystitis attacks during the COVID-19 pandemic process because elective surgeries stopped.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Cholecystectomy , Gallstones/complications , Ileus/etiology , Intestinal Obstruction/etiology , Withholding Treatment , Aged , Cholecystitis, Acute/diagnosis , Cholecystostomy , Elective Surgical Procedures , Female , Gallstones/diagnostic imaging , Humans , Ileus/diagnostic imaging , Intestinal Obstruction/diagnostic imaging , Pandemics , Time Factors
19.
JAMA ; 325(3): 254-264, 2021 01 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1239953

ABSTRACT

Importance: It is unknown whether angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) have a positive, neutral, or negative effect on clinical outcomes in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Objective: To determine whether discontinuation compared with continuation of ACEIs or ARBs changed the number of days alive and out of the hospital through 30 days. Design, Setting, and Participants: A randomized clinical trial of 659 patients hospitalized in Brazil with mild to moderate COVID-19 who were taking ACEIs or ARBs prior to hospitalization (enrolled: April 9-June 26, 2020; final follow-up: July 26, 2020). Interventions: Discontinuation (n = 334) or continuation (n = 325) of ACEIs or ARBs. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the number of days alive and out of the hospital through 30 days. Secondary outcomes included death, cardiovascular death, and COVID-19 progression. Results: Among 659 patients, the median age was 55.1 years (interquartile range [IQR], 46.1-65.0 years), 14.7% were aged 70 years or older, 40.4% were women, and 100% completed the trial. The median time from symptom onset to hospital admission was 6 days (IQR, 4-9 days) and 27.2% of patients had an oxygen saturation of less than 94% of room air at baseline. In terms of clinical severity, 57.1% of patients were considered mild at hospital admission and 42.9% were considered moderate. There was no significant difference in the number of days alive and out of the hospital in patients in the discontinuation group (mean, 21.9 days [SD, 8 days]) vs patients in the continuation group (mean, 22.9 days [SD, 7.1 days]) and the mean ratio was 0.95 (95% CI, 0.90-1.01). There also was no statistically significant difference in death (2.7% for the discontinuation group vs 2.8% for the continuation group; odds ratio [OR], 0.97 [95% CI, 0.38-2.52]), cardiovascular death (0.6% vs 0.3%, respectively; OR, 1.95 [95% CI, 0.19-42.12]), or COVID-19 progression (38.3% vs 32.3%; OR, 1.30 [95% CI, 0.95-1.80]). The most common adverse events were respiratory failure requiring invasive mechanical ventilation (9.6% in the discontinuation group vs 7.7% in the continuation group), shock requiring vasopressors (8.4% vs 7.1%, respectively), acute myocardial infarction (7.5% vs 4.6%), new or worsening heart failure (4.2% vs 4.9%), and acute kidney failure requiring hemodialysis (3.3% vs 2.8%). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients hospitalized with mild to moderate COVID-19 and who were taking ACEIs or ARBs before hospital admission, there was no significant difference in the mean number of days alive and out of the hospital for those assigned to discontinue vs continue these medications. These findings do not support routinely discontinuing ACEIs or ARBs among patients hospitalized with mild to moderate COVID-19 if there is an indication for treatment. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04364893.


Subject(s)
Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/therapeutic use , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Patient Discharge , SARS-CoV-2 , Withholding Treatment , Aged , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/mortality , Disease Progression , Female , Heart Failure/epidemiology , Hospitalization , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Odds Ratio , Respiration, Artificial/statistics & numerical data , Respiratory Insufficiency/etiology , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , Sample Size , Shock/drug therapy , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...