Negative prognostic impact of electrolyte disorders in patients hospitalized for Covid-19 in a large multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: The prognostic impact of electrolyte disorders in hospitalized COVID-19 patients is unclear. METHODS: The study included all adult patients hospitalized for COVID-19 in four hospitals in Northern Italy between January 2020 and May 2021 with at least one serum potassium and sodium measurement performed within 3 days since admission. Primary outcome was in-hospital death; secondary outcome was Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission. A cause-specific Cox proportional-hazards regression model was used for investigating the association between potassium and sodium (as either categorical or continuous variables) and mortality or admission to ICU. RESULTS: Analyses included 3,418 adult hospitalized COVID-19 patients. At multivariable analysis, both hyperkalemia (Hazard Ratio, [HR] 1.833, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 1.371-2.450) and sK above the median (K 5.1 vs 4.1 mmol/L: HR 1.523, 95% CI 1.295-1.798), and hypernatremia (HR 2.313, 95%CI 1.772-3.018) and sNa above the median (Na 149 vs 139 mmol/L: HR 1.442, 95% CI 1.234-1.686), were associated with in-hospital death, whereas hypokalemia and hyponatremia were not. Hyponatremia was associated with increased hazard of ICU admission (HR 1.884, 95%CI 1.389-2.556). CONCLUSIONS: Electrolyte disorders detected at hospital admission may allow early identification of COVID-19 patients at increased risk of adverse outcomes.

Incident Atrial Fibrillation and In-Hospital Mortality in SARS-CoV-2 Patients.

(1) Background: Among the different cardiovascular (CV) manifestations of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), arrhythmia and atrial fibrillation (AF) in particular have recently received special attention. The aims of our study were to estimate the incidence of AF in patients hospitalized for COVID-19, and to evaluate its role as a possible predictor of in-hospital all-cause mortality. (2) Methods: We enrolled 3435 people with SARS-CoV2 infection admitted to three hospitals in Northern Italy from February 2020 to May 2021. We collected data on their clinical history, laboratory tests, pharmacological treatment and intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Incident AF and all-cause in-hospital mortality were considered as outcomes. (3) Results: 145 (4.2%) patients developed AF during hospitalization, with a median time since admission of 3 days (I-III quartile: 0, 12). Patients with incident AF were admitted more frequently to the ICU (39.3 vs. 12.4%, p < 0.001), and more frequently died (37.2 vs. 16.9%, p < 0.001). In the Cox regression model, the significant determinants of incident AF were age (HR: 1.041; 95% CI: 1.022, 1.060 per year), a history of AF (HR: 2.720; 95% CI: 1.508, 4.907), lymphocyte count (HR: 0.584; 95% CI: 0.384, 0.888 per 103/µL), estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR, HR: 0.988; 95% CI: 0.980, 0.996 per mL/min) and ICU admission (HR: 5.311; 95% CI: 3.397, 8.302). Incident AF was a predictor of all-cause mortality (HR: 1.405; 95% CI: 1.027, 1.992) along with age (HR: 1.057; 95% CI: 1.047, 1.067), male gender (HR: 1.315; 95% CI: 1.064; 1.626), dementia (HR: 1.373; 95% CI: 1.045, 1.803), lower platelet (HR: 0.997; 95% CI: 0.996, 0.998 per 103/µL) and lymphocyte counts (HR: 0.843; 95% CI: 0.725, 0.982 per 103/µL), C-Reactive protein values (HR: 1.004; 95% CI: 1.003, 1.005 per mg/L), eGFR (HR: 0.990; 95% CI: 0.986, 0.994 per mL/min), and ICU admission (HR: 1.759; 95% CI: 1.292, 2.395). (4) Conclusions: Incident AF is a common complication in COVID-19 patients during hospitalization, and its occurrence strongly predicts in-hospital mortality.

Association Between Sex Hormone Levels and Clinical Outcomes in Patients With COVID-19 Admitted to Hospital: An Observational, Retrospective, Cohort Study.

Understanding the cause of sex disparities in COVID-19 outcomes is a major challenge. We investigate sex hormone levels and their association with outcomes in COVID-19 patients, stratified by sex and age. This observational, retrospective, cohort study included 138 patients aged 18 years or older with COVID-19, hospitalized in Italy between February 1 and May 30, 2020. The association between sex hormones (testosterone, estradiol, progesterone, dehydroepiandrosterone) and outcomes (ARDS, severe COVID-19, in-hospital mortality) was explored in 120 patients aged 50 years and over. STROBE checklist was followed. The median age was 73.5 years [IQR 61, 82]; 55.8% were male. In older males, testosterone was lower if ARDS and severe COVID-19 were reported than if not (3.6 vs. 5.3 nmol/L, p =0.0378 and 3.7 vs. 8.5 nmol/L, p =0.0011, respectively). Deceased males had lower testosterone (2.4 vs. 4.8 nmol/L, p =0.0536) and higher estradiol than survivors (40 vs. 24 pg/mL, p = 0.0006). Testosterone was negatively associated with ARDS (OR 0.849 [95% CI 0.734, 0.982]), severe COVID-19 (OR 0.691 [95% CI 0.546, 0.874]), and in-hospital mortality (OR 0.742 [95% CI 0.566, 0.972]), regardless of potential confounders, though confirmed only in the regression model on males. Higher estradiol was associated with a higher probability of death (OR 1.051 [95% CI 1.018, 1.084]), confirmed in both sex models. In males, higher testosterone seems to be protective against any considered outcome. Higher estradiol was associated with a higher probability of death in both sexes.

What is the recovery rate and risk of long-term consequences following a diagnosis of COVID-19? A harmonised, global longitudinal observational study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Very little is known about possible clinical sequelae that may persist after resolution of acute COVID-19. A recent longitudinal cohort from Italy including 143 patients followed up after hospitalisation with COVID-19 reported that 87% had at least one ongoing symptom at 60-day follow-up. Early indications suggest that patients with COVID-19 may need even more psychological support than typical intensive care unit patients. The assessment of risk factors for longer term consequences requires a longitudinal study linked to data on pre-existing conditions and care received during the acute phase of illness. The primary aim of this study is to characterise physical and psychosocial sequelae in patients post-COVID-19 hospital discharge. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is an international open-access prospective, observational multisite study. This protocol is linked with the International Severe Acute Respiratory and emerging Infection Consortium (ISARIC) and the WHO's Clinical Characterisation Protocol, which includes patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 during hospitalisation. This protocol will follow-up a subset of patients with confirmed COVID-19 using standardised surveys to measure longer term physical and psychosocial sequelae. The data will be linked with the acute phase data. Statistical analyses will be undertaken to characterise groups most likely to be affected by sequelae of COVID-19. The open-access follow-up survey can be used as a data collection tool by other follow-up studies, to facilitate data harmonisation and to identify subsets of patients for further in-depth follow-up. The outcomes of this study will inform strategies to prevent long-term consequences; inform clinical management, interventional studies, rehabilitation and public health management to reduce overall morbidity; and improve long-term outcomes of COVID-19. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol and survey are open access to enable low-resourced sites to join the study to facilitate global standardised, longitudinal data collection. Ethical approval has been given by sites in Colombia, Ghana, Italy, Norway, Russia, the UK and South Africa. New sites are welcome to join this collaborative study at any time. Sites interested in adopting the protocol as it is or in an adapted version are responsible for ensuring that local sponsorship and ethical approvals in place as appropriate. The tools are available on the ISARIC website (www.isaric.org). PROTOCOL REGISTRATION NUMBER: osf.io/c5rw3/ PROTOCOL VERSION: 3 August 2020 EUROQOL ID: 37035.

Sensitivity, Specificity and Predictive Values of Molecular and Serological Tests for COVID-19: A Longitudinal Study in Emergency Room.

BACKGROUND: We assessed the sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive value (PPV and NPV) of molecular and serological tests for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: A total of 346 patients were enrolled in the emergency room. We evaluated three Reverse Transcriptase-real time PCRs (RT-PCRs) including six different gene targets, five serologic rapid diagnostic tests (RDT) and one ELISA. The final classification of infected/non-infected patients was performed using Latent Class Analysis combined with clinical re-assessment of incongruous cases. RESULTS: Out of these, 24.6% of patients were classified as infected. The molecular test RQ-SARS-nCoV-2 showed the highest performance with 91.8% sensitivity, 100% specificity, 100.0% PPV and 97.4% NPV respectively. Considering the single gene targets, S and RdRp of RQ-SARS-nCoV-2 had the highest sensitivity (94.1%). The in-house RdRp presented the lowest sensitivity (62.4%). The specificity ranged from 99.2% for in-house RdRp and N2 to 95.0% for E. The PPV ranged from 97.1% of N2 to 85.4% of E and the NPV from 98.1% of S to 89.0% of in-house RdRp. All serological tests had < 50% sensitivity and low PPV and NPV. VivaDiag IgM (RDT) had 98.5% specificity, with 84.0% PPV, but 24.7% sensitivity. CONCLUSION: Molecular tests for SARS-CoV-2 infection showed excellent specificity, but significant differences in sensitivity. Serological tests have limited utility in a clinical context.