Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 220
Filter
1.
Multidiscip Respir Med ; 16(1): 759, 2021 Jan 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1810595

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In COVID-19, higher than expected level of intrapulmonary shunt has been described, in association with a discrepancy between the initial relatively preserved lung mechanics and the hypoxia severity. This study aim was to measure the shunt fraction and variations of PaO2/FiO2 ratio and oxygen alveolar-arterial gradient (A-a O2) at different FiO2. METHODS: Shunt was measured by a non-invasive system during spontaneous breathing in 12 patients hospitalized at COVID-19 Semi-Intensive Care Unit of Papa Giovanni XXIII Hospital, Bergamo, Italy, between October 22 and November 23, 2020. RESULTS: Nine patients were men, mean age (±SD) 62±15 years, mean BMI 27.5±4.8 Kg/m2. Systemic hypertension, diabetes type 2 and previous myocardial infarction were referred in 33%, 17%, and 7%, respectively. Mean PaO2/FiO2 ratio was 234±66 and 11 patients presented a bilateral chest X-ray involvement. Mean shunt was 21±6%. Mainly in patients with a more severe respiratory failure, we found a progressive decrease of PaO2/FiO2 ratio with higher FiO2. Considering (A-a O2), we found a uniform tendency to increase with FiO2 increasing. Even in this case, the more severe were the patients, the higher was the slope, suggesting FiO2 insensitiveness due to a shunt effect, as strengthened by our measurements. CONCLUSION: Relying on a single evaluation of PaO2/FiO2 ratio, especially at high FiO2, could be misleading in COVID-19. We propose a two steps evaluation, the first at low SpO2 value (e.g., 92-94%) and the second one at high FiO2 (i.e., >0.7), allowing to characterize both the amendable (ventilation/perfusion mismatch), and the fixed (shunt) contribution quote of respiratory impairment, respectively.

2.
Pneumologe (Berl) ; : 1-5, 2020 Aug 21.
Article in German | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1797596

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: At the beginning of the SARS-CoV­2 pandemic the focus of attention was on children and adolescents with chronic lung diseases. Due to a lack of epidemiological data and clinical experience, it was feared that children with respiratory diseases were a risk group for particularly severe courses of COVID-19, as has been reported for adults. OBJECTIVE: The currently available (epidemiological) data on this patient group are presented as well as a description of our own experiences based on three selected cases. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A review of the literature was carried out and three selected case reports and a discussion of current recommendations are presented. RESULTS: The incidence of COVID-19 is significantly lower in children than in adults. Furthermore, the known risk factors in adults cannot be simply transferred to pediatric patients. In the majority of cases, children and adolescents with chronic lung diseases show a milder course of SARS-CoV­2 infections. CONCLUSION: Although the hitherto available data show that children and adolescents have a lower risk for COVID-19 courses than adults, it should not be ignored that fatal outcomes have also been reported in pediatric patients. Moreover, late effects, such as the pediatric inflammatory multisystem syndrome (PIMS) can sometimes lead to a fatal outcome. Nevertheless, care must be taken that this vulnerable patient group does not suffer from avoidable negative side effects of restriction and isolation measures. As an example, the no-show behavior in outpatient departments during the lockdown might have led to a relevant undertreatment of underlying chronic health conditions.

3.
Crit Care Explor ; 2(9): e0220, 2020 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1795067

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To describe patients according to the maximum degree of respiratory support received and report their inpatient mortality due to coronavirus disease 2019. DESIGN: Analysis of patients in the Coracle registry from February 22, 2020, to April 1, 2020. SETTING: Hospitals in the Piedmont, Lombardy, Tuscany, and Lazio regions of Italy. PATIENTS: Nine-hundred forty-eight patients hospitalized for coronavirus disease 2019. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Among 948 patients, 122 (12.87%) received invasive ventilation, 637 (67.19%) received supplemental oxygen only, and 189 (19.94%) received no respiratory support. The median (quartile 1-quartile 3) age was 65 years (54-76.59 yr), and there was evidence of differential respiratory treatment by decade of life (p = 0.0046); patients greater than 80 years old were generally not intubated. There were 606 men (63.9%) in this study, and they were more likely to receive respiratory support than women (p < 0.0001). The rate of in-hospital death for invasive ventilation recipients was 22.95%, 12.87% for supplemental oxygen recipients, and 7.41% for those who received neither (p = 0.0004). A sensitivity analysis of the 770 patients less than 80 years old revealed a lower, but similar mortality trend (18.02%, 8.10%, 5.23%; p = 0.0008) among the 14.42%, 65.71%, and 19.87% of patients treated with mechanical ventilation, supplemental oxygen only, or neither. Overall, invasive ventilation recipients who died were significantly older than those who survived (median age: 68.5 yr [60-81.36 yr] vs 62.5 yr [55.52-71 yr]; p = 0.0145). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients hospitalized for coronavirus disease 2019, 13% received mechanical ventilation, which was associated with a mortality rate of 23%.

4.
Indian J Crit Care Med ; 24(10): 914-918, 2020 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1792087

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization (WHO) has declared SARS-CoV-2 as pandemic. Patients with COVID-19 present mainly with respiratory symptoms. Prone position has been traditionally used in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) to improve oxygenation and prevent barotrauma in ventilated patients. Awake proning is being used as an investigational therapy in COVID to defer invasive ventilation, improve oxygenation, and outcomes. Hence, we conducted a retrospective case study to look for benefits of awake proning with oxygen therapy in non-intubated COVID patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective case study of 15 COVID patients admitted from June 15 to July 1, 2020 to HDU in our hospital was conducted. Cooperative patients who were hemodynamically stable and SpO2 < 90% on presentation were included. Oxygen was administered through facemask, non-rebreathing mask and noninvasive ventilation to patients as per requirement. Patients were encouraged to maintain prone position and target time was 10-12 hours/day. SpO2 and P/f ratio in supine and prone position was observed till discharge. Primary target was SpO2 > 95% and P/f > 200 mm Hg. Other COVID therapies were used according to institutional protocol. RESULTS: The mean SpO2 on room air on admission was 80%. In day 1 to 3, the mean P/f ratio in supine position was 98.8 ± 29.7 mm Hg which improved to 136.6 ± 38.8 mm Hg after proning (p = 0.005). The difference was significant from day 1 to 10. Two patients were intubated. The mean duration of stay was 11 days. CONCLUSION: Awake prone positioning showed marked improvement in P/f ratio and SpO2 in COVID-19 patients with improvement in clinical symptoms with reduced rate of intubation. HIGHLIGHTS: Prone position ventilation improves oxygenation by reducing V/Q mismatch.Awake prone positioning has been used along with high-flow oxygen therapy in recent pandemic of SARS-CoV-2 virus for management of mild to moderate cases. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Singh P, Jain P, Deewan H. Awake Prone Positioning in COVID-19 Patients. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(10):914-918.

5.
Chin Med J (Engl) ; 133(9): 1015-1024, 2020 May 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1722617

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Human infections with zoonotic coronaviruses (CoVs), including severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS)-CoV, have raised great public health concern globally. Here, we report a novel bat-origin CoV causing severe and fatal pneumonia in humans. METHODS: We collected clinical data and bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) specimens from five patients with severe pneumonia from Wuhan Jinyintan Hospital, Hubei province, China. Nucleic acids of the BAL were extracted and subjected to next-generation sequencing. Virus isolation was carried out, and maximum-likelihood phylogenetic trees were constructed. RESULTS: Five patients hospitalized from December 18 to December 29, 2019 presented with fever, cough, and dyspnea accompanied by complications of acute respiratory distress syndrome. Chest radiography revealed diffuse opacities and consolidation. One of these patients died. Sequence results revealed the presence of a previously unknown ß-CoV strain in all five patients, with 99.8% to 99.9% nucleotide identities among the isolates. These isolates showed 79.0% nucleotide identity with the sequence of SARS-CoV (GenBank NC_004718) and 51.8% identity with the sequence of MERS-CoV (GenBank NC_019843). The virus is phylogenetically closest to a bat SARS-like CoV (SL-ZC45, GenBank MG772933) with 87.6% to 87.7% nucleotide identity, but is in a separate clade. Moreover, these viruses have a single intact open reading frame gene 8, as a further indicator of bat-origin CoVs. However, the amino acid sequence of the tentative receptor-binding domain resembles that of SARS-CoV, indicating that these viruses might use the same receptor. CONCLUSION: A novel bat-borne CoV was identified that is associated with severe and fatal respiratory disease in humans.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Adult , Aged , Betacoronavirus/genetics , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/diagnostic imaging , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnostic imaging , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Tomography, X-Ray , Treatment Outcome
6.
Can J Anaesth ; 67(9): 1217-1248, 2020 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1536371

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: We conducted two World Health Organization-commissioned reviews to inform use of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) in patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19). We synthesized the evidence regarding efficacy and safety (review 1), as well as risks of droplet dispersion, aerosol generation, and associated transmission (review 2) of viral products. SOURCE: Literature searches were performed in Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Chinese databases, and medRxiv. Review 1: we synthesized results from randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) comparing HFNC to conventional oxygen therapy (COT) in critically ill patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. Review 2: we narratively summarized findings from studies evaluating droplet dispersion, aerosol generation, or infection transmission associated with HFNC. For both reviews, paired reviewers independently conducted screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment. We evaluated certainty of evidence using GRADE methodology. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: No eligible studies included COVID-19 patients. Review 1: 12 RCTs (n = 1,989 patients) provided low-certainty evidence that HFNC may reduce invasive ventilation (relative risk [RR], 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74 to 0.99) and escalation of oxygen therapy (RR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.98) in patients with respiratory failure. Results provided no support for differences in mortality (moderate certainty), or in-hospital or intensive care length of stay (moderate and low certainty, respectively). Review 2: four studies evaluating droplet dispersion and three evaluating aerosol generation and dispersion provided very low certainty evidence. Two simulation studies and a crossover study showed mixed findings regarding the effect of HFNC on droplet dispersion. Although two simulation studies reported no associated increase in aerosol dispersion, one reported that higher flow rates were associated with increased regions of aerosol density. CONCLUSIONS: High-flow nasal cannula may reduce the need for invasive ventilation and escalation of therapy compared with COT in COVID-19 patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. This benefit must be balanced against the unknown risk of airborne transmission.


RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Nous avons réalisé deux comptes rendus sur commande de l'Organisation mondiale de la santé pour guider l'utilisation de canules nasales à haut débit (CNHD) chez les patients ayant contracté le coronavirus (COVID-19). Nous avons synthétisé les données probantes concernant leur efficacité et leur innocuité (compte rendu 1), ainsi que les risques de dispersion des gouttelettes, de génération d'aérosols, et de transmission associée d'éléments viraux (compte rendu 2). SOURCE: Des recherches de littérature ont été réalisées dans les bases de données Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, ainsi que dans les bases de données chinoises et medRxiv. Compte rendu 1 : nous avons synthétisé les résultats d'études randomisées contrôlées (ERC) comparant les CNHD à une oxygénothérapie conventionnelle chez des patients en état critique atteints d'insuffisance respiratoire hypoxémique aiguë. Compte rendu 2 : nous avons résumé sous forme narrative les constatations d'études évaluant la dispersion de gouttelettes, la génération d'aérosols ou la transmission infectieuse associées aux CNHD. Pour les deux comptes rendus, des réviseurs appariés ont réalisé la sélection des études, l'extraction des données et l'évaluation du risque de biais de manière indépendante. Nous avons évalué la certitude des données probantes en nous fondant sur la méthodologie GRADE. CONSTATATIONS PRINCIPALES: Aucune étude éligible n'incluait de patients atteints de COVID-19. Compte rendu 1 : 12 ERC (n = 1989 patients) ont fourni des données probantes de certitude faible selon lesquelles les CNHD réduiraient la ventilation invasive (risque relatif [RR], 0,85; intervalle de confiance [IC] 95 %, 0,74 à 0,99) et l'intensification de l'oxygénothérapie (RR, 0,71; IC 95 %, 0,51 à 0,98) chez les patients atteints d'insuffisance respiratoire. Les résultats n'ont pas démontré de différences en matière de mortalité (certitude modérée), ni de durée du séjour hospitalier ou à l'unité des soins intensifs (certitude modérée et faible, respectivement). Compte rendu 2 : quatre études évaluant la dispersion de gouttelettes et trois évaluant la génération et la dispersion d'aérosols ont fourni des données probantes de très faible certitude. Deux études de simulation et une étude croisée ont donné des résultats mitigés quant à l'effet des CNHD sur la dispersion des gouttelettes. Bien que deux études de simulation n'aient rapporté aucune augmentation associée concernant la dispersion d'aérosols, l'une a rapporté que des taux de débit plus élevés étaient associés à des régions à densité d'aérosols élevée plus grandes. CONCLUSION: Les canules nasales à haut débit pourraient réduire la nécessité de recourir à la ventilation invasive et l'escalade des traitements par rapport à l'oxygénothérapie conventionnelle chez les patients atteints de COVID-19 souffrant d'insuffisance respiratoire hypoxémique aiguë. Cet avantage doit être soupesé contre le risque inconnu de transmission atmosphérique.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Oxygen Inhalation Therapy/methods , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , Aerosols , COVID-19 , Cannula , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Humans , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Respiratory Insufficiency/physiopathology , Respiratory Insufficiency/virology
7.
Curr Anesthesiol Rep ; 11(2): 85-91, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1474172

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To review clinical evidence on whether or not to allow mechanically ventilated patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) to breathe spontaneously. RECENT FINDINGS: Observational data (LUNG SAFE study) indicate that mechanical ventilation allowing for spontaneous breathing (SB) is associated with more ventilator-free days and a shorter stay in the intensive care unit without any effect on hospital mortality. A paediatric trial, comparing airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) and low-tidal volume ventilation, showed an increase in mortality in the APRV group. Conversely, in an unpublished trial comparing SB and controlled ventilation (NCT01862016), the authors concluded that SB is feasible but did not improve outcomes in ARDS patients. SUMMARY: A paucity of clinical trial data continues to prevent firm guidance on if or when to allow SB during mechanical ventilation in patients with ARDS. No published large randomised controlled trial exists to inform practice about the benefits and harms of either mode.

8.
J Clin Med ; 9(12)2020 Dec 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1463718

ABSTRACT

Patients receiving mechanical ventilation for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) related, moderate-to-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (CARDS) have mortality rates between 76-98%. The objective of this retrospective cohort study was to identify differences in prone ventilation effects on oxygenation, pulmonary infiltrates (as observed on chest X-ray (CXR)), and systemic inflammation in CARDS patients by survivorship and to identify baseline characteristics associated with survival after prone ventilation. The study cohort included 23 patients with moderate-to-severe CARDS who received prone ventilation for ≥16 h/day and was segmented by living status: living (n = 6) and deceased (n = 17). Immediately after prone ventilation, PaO2/FiO2 improved by 108% (p < 0.03) for the living and 150% (p < 3 × 10-4) for the deceased. However, the 48 h change in lung infiltrate severity in gravity-dependent lung zones was significantly better for the living than for the deceased (p < 0.02). In CXRs of the lower lungs before prone ventilation, we observed 5 patients with confluent infiltrates bilaterally, 12 patients with ground-glass opacities (GGOs) bilaterally, and 6 patients with mixed infiltrate patterns; 80% of patients with confluent infiltrates were alive vs. 8% of patients with GGOs. In conclusion, our small study indicates that CXRs may offer clinical utility in selecting patients with moderate-to-severe CARDS who will benefit from prone ventilation. Additionally, our study suggests that lung infiltrate severity may be a better indicator of patient disposition after prone ventilation than PaO2/FiO2.

9.
Lancet Respir Med ; 9(8): 909-923, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1411740

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Previous studies suggested that the prevalence of chronic respiratory disease in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 was lower than its prevalence in the general population. The aim of this study was to assess whether chronic lung disease or use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) affects the risk of contracting severe COVID-19. METHODS: In this population cohort study, records from 1205 general practices in England that contribute to the QResearch database were linked to Public Health England's database of SARS-CoV-2 testing and English hospital admissions, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, and deaths for COVID-19. All patients aged 20 years and older who were registered with one of the 1205 general practices on Jan 24, 2020, were included in this study. With Cox regression, we examined the risks of COVID-19-related hospitalisation, admission to ICU, and death in relation to respiratory disease and use of ICS, adjusting for demographic and socioeconomic status and comorbidities associated with severe COVID-19. FINDINGS: Between Jan 24 and April 30, 2020, 8 256 161 people were included in the cohort and observed, of whom 14 479 (0·2%) were admitted to hospital with COVID-19, 1542 (<0·1%) were admitted to ICU, and 5956 (0·1%) died. People with some respiratory diseases were at an increased risk of hospitalisation (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD] hazard ratio [HR] 1·54 [95% CI 1·45-1·63], asthma 1·18 [1·13-1·24], severe asthma 1·29 [1·22-1·37; people on three or more current asthma medications], bronchiectasis 1·34 [1·20-1·50], sarcoidosis 1·36 [1·10-1·68], extrinsic allergic alveolitis 1·35 [0·82-2·21], idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis 1·59 [1·30-1·95], other interstitial lung disease 1·66 [1·30-2·12], and lung cancer 2·24 [1·89-2·65]) and death (COPD 1·54 [1·42-1·67], asthma 0·99 [0·91-1·07], severe asthma 1·08 [0·98-1·19], bronchiectasis 1·12 [0·94-1·33], sarcoidosis 1·41 [0·99-1·99), extrinsic allergic alveolitis 1·56 [0·78-3·13], idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis 1·47 [1·12-1·92], other interstitial lung disease 2·05 [1·49-2·81], and lung cancer 1·77 [1·37-2·29]) due to COVID-19 compared with those without these diseases. Admission to ICU was rare, but the HR for people with asthma was 1·08 (0·93-1·25) and severe asthma was 1·30 (1·08-1·58). In a post-hoc analysis, relative risks of severe COVID-19 in people with respiratory disease were similar before and after shielding was introduced on March 23, 2020. In another post-hoc analysis, people with two or more prescriptions for ICS in the 150 days before study start were at a slightly higher risk of severe COVID-19 compared with all other individuals (ie, no or one ICS prescription): HR 1·13 (1·03-1·23) for hospitalisation, 1·63 (1·18-2·24) for ICU admission, and 1·15 (1·01-1·31) for death. INTERPRETATION: The risk of severe COVID-19 in people with asthma is relatively small. People with COPD and interstitial lung disease appear to have a modestly increased risk of severe disease, but their risk of death from COVID-19 at the height of the epidemic was mostly far lower than the ordinary risk of death from any cause. Use of inhaled steroids might be associated with a modestly increased risk of severe COVID-19. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Oxford Biomedical Research Centre and the Wellcome Trust.


Subject(s)
Adrenal Cortex Hormones , COVID-19 , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive , Administration, Inhalation , Adrenal Cortex Hormones/administration & dosage , Adrenal Cortex Hormones/adverse effects , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/physiopathology , COVID-19 Testing , Comorbidity , England/epidemiology , Female , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Mortality , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/diagnosis , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/drug therapy , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/epidemiology , Risk Assessment , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Social Class
10.
Rheumatology (Oxford) ; 60(1): 399-407, 2021 01 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1388014

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor baricitinib may block viral entry into pneumocytes and prevent cytokine storm in patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. We aimed to assess whether baricitinib improved pulmonary function in patients treated with high-dose corticosteroids for moderate to severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. METHODS: This observational study enrolled patients with moderate to severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia [arterial oxygen partial pressure (PaO2)/fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) <200 mmHg] who received lopinavir/ritonavir and HCQ plus either corticosteroids (CS group, n = 50) or corticosteroids and baricitinib (BCT-CS group, n = 62). The primary end point was the change in oxygen saturation as measured by pulse oximetry (SpO2)/FiO2 from hospitalization to discharge. Secondary end points included the proportion of patients requiring supplemental oxygen at discharge and 1 month later. Statistics were adjusted by the inverse propensity score weighting (IPSW). RESULTS: A greater improvement in SpO2/FiO2 from hospitalization to discharge was observed in the BCT-CS vs CS group (mean differences adjusted for IPSW, 49; 95% CI: 22, 77; P < 0.001). A higher proportion of patients required supplemental oxygen both at discharge (62.0% vs 25.8%; reduction of the risk by 82%, OR adjusted for IPSW, 0.18; 95% CI: 0.08, 0.43; P < 0.001) and 1 month later (28.0% vs 12.9%, reduction of the risk by 69%, OR adjusted for IPSW, 0.31; 95% CI: 0.11, 0.86; P = 0.024) in the CS vs BCT-CS group. CONCLUSIONS: . In patients with moderate to severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia a combination of baricitinib with corticosteroids was associated with greater improvement in pulmonary function when compared with corticosteroids alone. TRIAL REGISTRATION: European Network of Centres for Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacovigilance, ENCEPP (EUPAS34966, http://www.encepp.eu/encepp/viewResource.htm? id = 34967).


Subject(s)
Azetidines/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Glucocorticoids/therapeutic use , Hypoxia/therapy , Janus Kinase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Methylprednisolone/therapeutic use , Oxygen Inhalation Therapy/statistics & numerical data , Purines/therapeutic use , Pyrazoles/therapeutic use , Sulfonamides/therapeutic use , Aged , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/metabolism , COVID-19/physiopathology , Cohort Studies , Drug Combinations , Drug Therapy, Combination , Endothelium, Vascular , Enzyme Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Female , Fibrin Fibrinogen Degradation Products/metabolism , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Immunoglobulins, Intravenous/therapeutic use , Immunologic Factors/therapeutic use , Interferon beta-1b/therapeutic use , Lopinavir/therapeutic use , Lung/blood supply , Male , Middle Aged , Oximetry , Prospective Studies , Ritonavir/therapeutic use , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index
11.
Lancet Respir Med ; 9(7): 699-711, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1337033

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Studies of patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 have found varying mortality outcomes associated with underlying respiratory conditions and inhaled corticosteroid use. Using data from a national, multicentre, prospective cohort, we aimed to characterise people with COVID-19 admitted to hospital with underlying respiratory disease, assess the level of care received, measure in-hospital mortality, and examine the effect of inhaled corticosteroid use. METHODS: We analysed data from the International Severe Acute Respiratory and emerging Infection Consortium (ISARIC) WHO Clinical Characterisation Protocol UK (CCP-UK) study. All patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 across England, Scotland, and Wales between Jan 17 and Aug 3, 2020, were eligible for inclusion in this analysis. Patients with asthma, chronic pulmonary disease, or both, were identified and stratified by age (<16 years, 16-49 years, and ≥50 years). In-hospital mortality was measured by use of multilevel Cox proportional hazards, adjusting for demographics, comorbidities, and medications (inhaled corticosteroids, short-acting ß-agonists [SABAs], and long-acting ß-agonists [LABAs]). Patients with asthma who were taking an inhaled corticosteroid plus LABA plus another maintenance asthma medication were considered to have severe asthma. FINDINGS: 75 463 patients from 258 participating health-care facilities were included in this analysis: 860 patients younger than 16 years (74 [8·6%] with asthma), 8950 patients aged 16-49 years (1867 [20·9%] with asthma), and 65 653 patients aged 50 years and older (5918 [9·0%] with asthma, 10 266 [15·6%] with chronic pulmonary disease, and 2071 [3·2%] with both asthma and chronic pulmonary disease). Patients with asthma were significantly more likely than those without asthma to receive critical care (patients aged 16-49 years: adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1·20 [95% CI 1·05-1·37]; p=0·0080; patients aged ≥50 years: adjusted OR 1·17 [1·08-1·27]; p<0·0001), and patients aged 50 years and older with chronic pulmonary disease (with or without asthma) were significantly less likely than those without a respiratory condition to receive critical care (adjusted OR 0·66 [0·60-0·72] for those without asthma and 0·74 [0·62-0·87] for those with asthma; p<0·0001 for both). In patients aged 16-49 years, only those with severe asthma had a significant increase in mortality compared to those with no asthma (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1·17 [95% CI 0·73-1·86] for those on no asthma therapy, 0·99 [0·61-1·58] for those on SABAs only, 0·94 [0·62-1·43] for those on inhaled corticosteroids only, 1·02 [0·67-1·54] for those on inhaled corticosteroids plus LABAs, and 1·96 [1·25-3·08] for those with severe asthma). Among patients aged 50 years and older, those with chronic pulmonary disease had a significantly increased mortality risk, regardless of inhaled corticosteroid use, compared to patients without an underlying respiratory condition (adjusted HR 1·16 [95% CI 1·12-1·22] for those not on inhaled corticosteroids, and 1·10 [1·04-1·16] for those on inhaled corticosteroids; p<0·0001). Patients aged 50 years and older with severe asthma also had an increased mortality risk compared to those not on asthma therapy (adjusted HR 1·24 [95% CI 1·04-1·49]). In patients aged 50 years and older, inhaled corticosteroid use within 2 weeks of hospital admission was associated with decreased mortality in those with asthma, compared to those without an underlying respiratory condition (adjusted HR 0·86 [95% CI 0·80-0·92]). INTERPRETATION: Underlying respiratory conditions are common in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19. Regardless of the severity of symptoms at admission and comorbidities, patients with asthma were more likely, and those with chronic pulmonary disease less likely, to receive critical care than patients without an underlying respiratory condition. In patients aged 16 years and older, severe asthma was associated with increased mortality compared to non-severe asthma. In patients aged 50 years and older, inhaled corticosteroid use in those with asthma was associated with lower mortality than in patients without an underlying respiratory condition; patients with chronic pulmonary disease had significantly increased mortality compared to those with no underlying respiratory condition, regardless of inhaled corticosteroid use. Our results suggest that the use of inhaled corticosteroids, within 2 weeks of admission, improves survival for patients aged 50 years and older with asthma, but not for those with chronic pulmonary disease. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research, Medical Research Council, NIHR Health Protection Research Units in Emerging and Zoonotic Infections at the University of Liverpool and in Respiratory Infections at Imperial College London in partnership with Public Health England.


Subject(s)
Asthma/complications , Asthma/mortality , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/mortality , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/complications , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/mortality , Adolescent , Adult , Clinical Protocols , Cohort Studies , Female , Hospital Mortality , Hospitalization , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Risk Assessment , United Kingdom , World Health Organization , Young Adult
12.
BMC Infect Dis ; 21(1): 458, 2021 May 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1322925

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: During the spike of COVID-19 pandemic in Kazakhstan (June-2020), multiple SARS-CoV-2 PCR-test negative pneumonia cases with higher mortality were reported by media. We aimed to study the epidemiologic characteristics of hospitalized PCR-test positive and negative patients with analysis of in-hospital and post-hospital mortality. We also compare the respiratory disease characteristics between 2019 and 2020. METHODS: The study population consist of 17,691 (March-July-2020) and 4600 (March-July-2019) hospitalized patients with respiratory diseases (including COVID-19). The incidence rate, case-fatality rate and survival analysis for overall mortality (in-hospital and post-hospital) were assessed. RESULTS: The incidence and mortality rates for respiratory diseases were 4-fold and 11-fold higher in 2020 compared to 2019 (877.5 vs 228.2 and 11.2 vs 1.2 per 100,000 respectively). The PCR-positive cases (compared to PCR-negative) had 2-fold higher risk of overall mortality. We observed 24% higher risk of death in males compared to females and in older patients compared to younger ones. Patients residing in rural areas had 66% higher risk of death compared to city residents and being treated in a provisional hospital was associated with 1.9-fold increased mortality compared to those who were treated in infectious disease hospitals. CONCLUSION: This is the first study from the Central Asia and Eurasia regions, evaluating the mortality of SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive and PCR-negative respiratory system diseases during the peak of COVID-19 pandemic. We describe a higher mortality rate for PCR-test positive cases compared to PCR-test negative cases, for males compared to females, for elder patients compared to younger ones and for patients living in rural areas compared to city residents.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/mortality , Pneumonia/diagnosis , RNA, Viral/metabolism , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Female , Hospital Mortality , Hospitalization , Humans , Kazakhstan/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia/mortality , Pneumonia/virology , RNA, Viral/analysis , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Survival Rate , Young Adult
13.
Analyst ; 146(12): 3908-3917, 2021 Jun 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1319050

ABSTRACT

The pandemic outbreak of the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19), which is caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is still spreading rapidly and poses a great threat to human health. As such, developing rapid and accurate immunodiagnostic methods for the identification of infected persons is needed. Here, we proposed a simple but sensitive on-site testing method based on spike protein-conjugated quantum dot (QD) nanotag-integrated lateral flow immunoassay (LFA) to simultaneously detect SARS-CoV-2-specific IgM and IgG in human serum. Advanced silica-core@dual QD-shell nanocomposites (SiO2@DQD) with superior luminescence and stability were prepared to serve as fluorescent nanotags in the LFA strip and guarantee high sensitivity and reliability of the assay. The performance of the SiO2@DQD-strip was fully optimized and confirmed by using 10 positive serum samples from COVID-19 patients and 10 negative samples from patients with other respiratory diseases. The practical clinical value of the assay was further evaluated by testing 316 serum samples (114 positive and 202 negative samples). The overall detection sensitivity and specificity reached 97.37% (111/114) and 95.54% (193/202), respectively, indicating the huge potential of our proposed method for the rapid and accurate detection of SARS-CoV-2-infected persons and asymptomatic carriers.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus , Antibodies, Viral , Humans , Immunoassay , Immunoglobulin G , Immunoglobulin M , Reproducibility of Results , SARS-CoV-2 , Sensitivity and Specificity , Silicon Dioxide
14.
Crit Care Med ; 49(7): 1026-1037, 2021 07 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1307563

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Therapies for patients with respiratory failure from coronavirus disease 2019 are urgently needed. Early implementation of prone positioning ventilation improves survival in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome, but studies examining the effect of proning on survival in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 are lacking. Our objective was to estimate the effect of early proning initiation on survival in patients with coronavirus disease 2019-associated respiratory failure. DESIGN: Data were derived from the Study of the Treatment and Outcomes in Critically Ill Patients with coronavirus disease 2019, a multicenter cohort study of critically ill adults with coronavirus disease 2019 admitted to 68 U.S. hospitals. Using these data, we emulated a target trial of prone positioning ventilation by categorizing mechanically ventilated hypoxemic (ratio of Pao2 over the corresponding Fio2 ≤ 200 mm Hg) patients as having been initiated on proning or not within 2 days of ICU admission. We fit an inverse probability-weighted Cox model to estimate the mortality hazard ratio for early proning versus no early proning. Patients were followed until death, hospital discharge, or end of follow-up. SETTING: ICUs at 68 U.S. sites. PATIENTS: Critically ill adults with laboratory-confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 receiving invasive mechanical ventilation with ratio of Pao2 over the corresponding Fio2 less than or equal to 200 mm Hg. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Among 2,338 eligible patients, 702 (30.0%) were proned within the first 2 days of ICU admission. After inverse probability weighting, baseline and severity of illness characteristics were well-balanced between groups. A total of 1,017 (43.5%) of the 2,338 patients were discharged alive, 1,101 (47.1%) died, and 220 (9.4%) were still hospitalized at last follow-up. Patients proned within the first 2 days of ICU admission had a lower adjusted risk of death compared with nonproned patients (hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.73-0.97). CONCLUSIONS: In-hospital mortality was lower in mechanically ventilated hypoxemic patients with coronavirus disease 2019 treated with early proning compared with patients whose treatment did not include early proning.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Hypoxia/therapy , Patient Positioning , Prone Position , Respiration, Artificial , Respiratory Insufficiency/etiology , Aged , Cohort Studies , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2 , Survival Analysis , Time-to-Treatment , United States/epidemiology
15.
Acute Crit Care ; 36(2): 143-150, 2021 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1289166

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Evidence prior to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic suggested that, compared with conventional ventilation strategies, airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) can improve oxygenation and reduce mortality in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. We aimed to assess the association between APRV use and clinical outcomes among adult patients receiving mechanical ventilation for COVID-19 and hypothesized that APRV use would be associated with improved survival compared with conventional ventilation. METHODS: A total of 25 patients with COVID-19 pneumonitis was admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) for invasive ventilation in Perth, Western Australia, between February and May 2020. Eleven of these patients received APRV. The primary outcome was survival to day 90. Secondary outcomes were ventilation-free survival days to day 90, mechanical complications from ventilation, and number of days ventilated. RESULTS: Patients who received APRV had a lower probability of survival than did those on other forms of ventilation (hazard ratio, 0.17; 95% confidence interval, 0.03-0.89; P=0.036). This finding was independent of indices of severity of illness to predict the use of APRV. Patients who received APRV also had fewer ventilator-free survival days up to 90 days after initiation of ventilation compared to patients who did not receive APRV, and survivors who received APRV had fewer ventilator-free days than survivors who received other forms of ventilation. There were no differences in mechanical complications according to mode of ventilation. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the findings of this study, we urge caution with the use of APRV in COVID-19.

16.
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging ; 48(13): 4339-4349, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1274811

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: In the prediction of COVID-19 disease progression, a clear illustration and early determination of an area that will be affected by pneumonia remain great challenges. In this study, we aimed to predict and visualize the progression of lung lesions in COVID-19 patients in the early stage of illness by using chest CT. METHODS: COVID-19 patients who underwent three chest CT scans in the progressive phase were retrospectively enrolled. An extended CT ventilation imaging (CTVI) method was proposed in this work that was adapted to use two chest CT scans acquired on different days, and then lung ventilation maps were generated. The prediction maps were obtained according to the fractional ventilation values, which were related to pulmonary regional function and tissue property changes. The third CT scan was used to validate whether the prediction maps could be used to distinguish healthy regions and potential lesions. RESULTS: A total of 30 patients (mean age ± SD, 43 ± 10 years, 19 females, and 2-12 days between the second and third CT scans) were included in this study. The predicted lesion locations and sizes were almost the same as the true ones visualized in third CT scan. Quantitatively, the predicted lesion volumes and true lesion volumes showed both a good Pearson correlation (R2 = 0.80; P < 0.001) and good consistency in the Bland-Altman plot (mean bias = 0.04 cm3). Regarding the enlargements of the existing lesions, prediction results also exhibited a good Pearson correlation (R2 = 0.76; P < 0.001) with true lesion enlargements. CONCLUSION: The present findings demonstrated that the extended CTVI method could accurately predict and visualize the progression of lung lesions in COVID-19 patients in the early stage of illness, which is helpful for physicians to predetermine the severity of COVID-19 pneumonia and make effective treatment plans in advance.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Female , Humans , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Tomography, X-Ray Computed
17.
Med Hypotheses ; 153: 110628, 2021 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1272625

ABSTRACT

Presently, it remains unclear why the prevalence of lung diseases, namely chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), is much lower than other medical comorbidities and the general population among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). If COVID-19 is a respiratory disease, why is COPD not the leading risk factor for contracting COVID-19? The same odd phenomenon was also observed with other pathogenic human coronaviruses causing severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), but not other respiratory viral infections such as influenza and respiratory syncytial viruses. One commonly proposed reason for the low COPD rates among COVID-19 patients is the usage of inhaled corticosteroids or bronchodilators that may protect against COVID-19. However, another possible reason not discussed elsewhere is that lungs in a diseased state may not be conducive for the severe acute respiratory distress syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) to establish COVID-19. For one, COPD causes mucous plugging in large and small airways, which may hinder SARS-CoV-2 from reaching deeper parts of the lungs (i.e., alveoli). Thus, SARS-CoV-2 may only localize to the upper respiratory tract of persons with COPD, causing mild or asymptomatic infections requiring no hospital attention. Even if SARS-CoV-2 reaches the alveoli, cells therein are probably under a heavy burden of endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress and extensively damaged where it may not support efficient viral replication. As a result, limited SARS-CoV-2 virions would be produced in diseased lungs, preventing the development of COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive , Humans , Lung , Prevalence , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/complications , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2
18.
Int J Clin Pract ; 75(10): e14532, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1269740

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There is a great need to make a rapid differential clinical diagnosis of COVID-19 among respiratory disease patients and determining the prevalence rate of these diseases among the COVID-19 population. METHOD: Approximately 522 patients with allergic rhinitis, asthma, COPD, and COVID-19 were analysed for demographic and clinical features. Radiological features were analysed only for COVID-19 patients. RESULTS: COPD and asthma were more common among COVID-19 patients than allergic rhinitis. All chest CT scans of COVID-19 patients showed bilateral ground-glass opacity. Fever, dry cough, diarrhea, loss of sense of smell and taste, shortness of breath, and blue lips were significantly higher in all COVID-19 patients compared to COPD, asthma, and allergic rhinitis patients. CONCLUSION: The presence of clinical symptoms such as fever, dry cough, diarrhea, loss of sense of smell and taste, shortness of breath, and blue lips in COVID-19 patients, can be used for differential diagnosis between COVID-19 patients and other respiratory diseases. Then, the diagnosis can be confirmed by chest CT scan for COVID-19 patients without the need for a nasopharyngeal swab or PCR test, especially in epidemic countries. Allergic rhinitis patients are the least exposed to COVID-19 infection among other respiratory disease patients.


Subject(s)
Asthma , COVID-19 , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive , Rhinitis, Allergic , Asthma/diagnosis , Asthma/epidemiology , Diagnosis, Differential , Humans , Prevalence , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/complications , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/diagnosis , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/epidemiology , Rhinitis, Allergic/diagnosis , Rhinitis, Allergic/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2
19.
Eur Geriatr Med ; 12(6): 1147-1157, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1265608

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Older people are the most frequently hospital admitted patients with COVID-19. We aimed to describe the clinical presentation of COVID-19 among frail and nonfrail older hospitalised patients and to evaluate the potential association between frailty and clinical course, decision of treatment level with outcomes change in functional capacity and survival. METHODS: We performed a multi-center, retrospective cross-sectional cohort study examining data on clinical presentation and frailty-related domains for hospitalised people aged 75 + years with a positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) test. Frailty was assessed at admission using record-based MPI (rMPI) and Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS). Decision on treatment level about invasive ventilation and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), change in CFS-score from admission to discharge, changed need of home care, and in-hospital, 30-day and 90-day mortality were registered. RESULTS: 100 patients (median age 82 years (IQR 78-86), 56% female) with COVID-19 were included. 54 patients were assessed moderately or severely frail (rMPI-score = 2 or 3) and compared to non-frail (rMPI-score = 1). At admission, frail patients presented more frequently with confusion. At discharge, functional decline measured by change in CFS and increased home care was more prevalent among frail than the non-frail. Decisions about no invasive ventilation or CPR were more prevalent among frail older patients with COVID-19 than non-frail. Ninety-day mortality was 70% among frail patients versus 15% in non-frail. CONCLUSION: Frailty seems to be associated with confusion, more frequent decisions about treatment level, larger functional decline at discharge and a higher mortality rate among older patients with COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Prognosis , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
20.
Surg J (N Y) ; 7(2): e69-e72, 2021 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1262023

ABSTRACT

Introduction Concerns relating to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and general anesthesia (GA) prompted our department to consider that open appendicectomy under spinal anesthesia (SA) avoids aerosolization from intubation and laparoscopy. While common in developing nations, it is unusual in the United Kingdom. We present the first United Kingdom case series and discuss its potential role during and after this pandemic. Methods We prospectively studied patients with appendicitis at a British district general hospital who were unsuitable for conservative management and consequently underwent open appendicectomy under SA. We also reviewed patient satisfaction after 30 days. This ran for 5 weeks from March 25th, 2020 until the surgical department reverted to the laparoscopic appendicectomy as the standard of care. Main outcomes were 30-day complication rates and patient satisfaction. Results None of the included seven patients were COVID positive. The majority (four-sevenths) had complicated appendicitis. There were no major adverse (Clavien-Dindo grade III to V) postoperative events. Two patients suffered minor postoperative complications. Two experienced intraoperative pain. Mean operative time was 44 minutes. Median length of stay and return to activity was 1 and 14 days, respectively. Although four stated preference in hindsight for GA, the majority (five-sevenths) were satisfied with the operative experience under SA. Discussion Although contraindications, risk of pain, and specific complications may be limiting, our series demonstrates open appendicectomy under SA to be safe and feasible in the United Kingdom. The technique could be a valuable contingency for COVID-suspected cases and patients with high-risk respiratory disease.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL