Role of prognostic scores in predicting in-hospital mortality and failure of non-invasive ventilation in adults with COVID-19.

We tested the prognostic performance of different scores for the identification of subjects with acute respiratory failure by COVID-19, at risk of in-hospital mortality and NIV failure. We conducted a retrospective study, in the Medical High-Dependency Unit of the University-Hospital Careggi. We included all subjects with COVID-19 and ARF requiring non-invasive ventilation (NIV) between March 2020 and January 2021. Clinical parameters, the HACOR score (Heart rate, Acidosis, Consciousness, Oxygenation, Respiratory Rate) and ROX index ((SpO2/FiO2)/respiratory rate) were collected 3 (-3) and 1 day (-1) before the NIV initiation, the first day of treatment (Day0) and after 1 (+1), 2 (+2), 5 (+5), 8 (+8) and 11 (+11) of treatment. The primary outcomes were in-hospital mortality and NIV failure. We included 135 subjects, mean age 69±13 years, 69% male. Patients, who needed mechanical ventilation, showed a higher HACOR score (Day0: 6 [5-7] vs 6 [6-7], p=.057; Day+2: 6 [6-6] vs 6 [4-6], p=.013) and a lower ROX index (Day0: 4.2±2.3 vs 5.1±2.3, p=.055; Day+2: 4.4±1.2.vs 5.5±1.3, p=.001) than those with successful NIV. An HACOR score >5 was more frequent among nonsurvivors (Day0: 82% vs 58%; Day2: 82% vs 48%, all p<0.01) and it was associated with in-hospital mortality (Day0: RR 5.88, 95%CI 2.01-17.22; Day2: RR 4.33, 95%CI 1.64-11.41) independent to age and Charlson index. In conclusion, in subjects treated with NIV for ARF caused by COVID19, respiratory parameters collected after the beginning of NIV allowed to identify those at risk of an adverse outcome. An HACOR score >5 was independently associated with increased mortality rate.

D-Dimer Tests in the Emergency Department: Current Insights.

In the Emergency Medicine setting, D-dimer is currently employed in the diagnostic assessment of suspected venous thromboembolism and aortic syndrome. The nonspecific symptoms reported by patients, like chest pain, dyspnea or syncope, uncover a wide range of differential diagnosis, spanning from mild to life-threatening conditions. Therefore, we assumed the perspective of the Emergency Physician and, in this narrative review, we reported a brief presentation of the epidemiology of these symptoms and the characteristics of patients, in whom we could suspect the aforementioned pathologies. We also reported in which patients D-dimer gives useful information. In fact, when the probability of the disease is high, the D-dimer level is futile. On the contrary, given the low specificity of the test, when the probability of the disease is very low, a false-positive value of the D-dimer only increases the risk of overtesting. Patients with low to moderate probability really benefit from the D-dimer testing, in order to prevent the execution of expensive and potentially dangerous imaging tests. In the second part of the review, we focused on the prognostic value of the test in septic patients. The early prognostic stratification of septic patients remains a challenge for the Emergency Physician, in the absence of a definite biomarker or score to rely on. Therefore, we need several parameters for the early identification of patients at risk of an adverse prognosis and the D-dimer may play a role in this demanding task. SARS COVID-19 patients represent an emerging reality, where the role of the D-dimer for prognostic stratification could be relevant. In fact, in patients with severe forms of this disease, the D-dimer reaches very high values, which appear to parallel the course of respiratory failure. Whether the test may add useful information for the management of these patients remains to be determined.

Incidence of deep vein thrombosis through an ultrasound surveillance protocol in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia in non-ICU setting: A multicenter prospective study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the incidence of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) of the lower limbs, using serial compression ultrasound (CUS) surveillance, in acutely ill patients with COVID-19 pneumonia admitted to a non-ICU setting. METHODS: Multicenter, prospective study of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia admitted to Internal Medicine units. All patients were screened for DVT of the lower limbs with serial CUS. Anticoagulation was defined as: low dose (enoxaparin 20-40 mg/day or fondaparinux 1.5-2.5 mg/day); intermediate dose (enoxaparin 60-80 mg/day); high dose (enoxaparin 120-160 mg or fondaparinux 5-10 mg/day or oral anticoagulation). The primary end-point of the study was the diagnosis of DVT by CUS. RESULTS: Over a two-month period, 227 consecutive patients with moderate-severe COVID-19 pneumonia were enrolled. The incidence of DVT was 13.7% (6.2% proximal, 7.5% distal), mostly asymptomatic. All patients received anticoagulation (enoxaparin 95.6%) at the following doses: low 57.3%, intermediate 22.9%, high 19.8%. Patients with and without DVT had similar characteristics, and no difference in anticoagulant regimen was observed. DVT patients were older (mean 77±9.6 vs 71±13.1 years; p = 0.042) and had higher peak D-dimer levels (5403 vs 1723 ng/mL; p = 0.004). At ROC analysis peak D-dimer level >2000 ng/mL (AUC 0.703; 95% CI 0.572-0.834; p = 0.004) was the most accurate cut-off value able to predict DVT (RR 3.74; 95%CI 1.27-10, p = 0.016). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of DVT in acutely ill patients with COVID-19 pneumonia is relevant. A surveillance protocol by serial CUS of the lower limbs is useful to timely identify DVT that would go otherwise largely undetected.