Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Añadir filtros

Base de datos
Tipo del documento
Intervalo de año
1.
Infect Dis (Lond) ; 55(5): 351-360, 2023 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2268183

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The combined effectiveness of remdesivir and dexamethasone in subgroups of hospitalised patients with COVID-19 is poorly investigated. METHODS: In this nationwide retrospective cohort study, we included 3826 patients with COVID-19 hospitalised between February 2020 and April 2021. The primary outcomes were use of invasive mechanical ventilation and 30-day mortality, comparing a cohort treated with remdesivir and dexamethasone with a previous cohort treated without remdesivir and dexamethasone. We used inverse probability of treatment weighting logistic regression to assess associations with progression to invasive mechanical ventilation and 30-day mortality between the two cohorts. The analyses were conducted overall and by subgroups based on patient characteristics. RESULTS: Odds ratio for progression to invasive mechanical ventilation and 30-day mortality in individuals treated with remdesivir and dexamethasone compared to treatment with standard of care alone was 0.46 (95% confidence interval, 0.37-0.57) and 0.47 (95% confidence interval, 0.39-0.56), respectively. The reduced risk of mortality was observed in elderly patients, overweight patients and in patients requiring supplemental oxygen at admission, regardless of sex, comorbidities and symptom duration. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with remdesivir and dexamethasone had significantly improved outcomes compared to patients treated with standard of care alone. These effects were observed in most patient subgroups.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , Anciano , SARS-CoV-2 , Estudios Retrospectivos , Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , Antivirales/uso terapéutico , Dexametasona/uso terapéutico
2.
Sci Rep ; 12(1): 16385, 2022 09 30.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2050519

RESUMEN

Passive immunotherapy with convalescent plasma may be the only available agent during the early phases of a pandemic. Here, we report safety and efficacy of high-titer convalescent plasma for COVID-19 pneumonia. Double-blinded randomized multicenter placebo-controlled trial of adult patients hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia. The intervention was COVID-19 convalescent plasma and placebo was saline allocated 2:1. The primary outcome was clinical status 14 days after the intervention evaluated on a clinical ordinal scale. The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.Gov, NCT04345289, 14/04/2020. The CCAP-2 trial was terminated prematurely due to futility. Of 147 patients randomized, we included 144 patients in the modified intention-to-treat population. The ordinal clinical status 14 days post-intervention was comparable between treatment groups (odds ratio (OR) 1.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72-2.09). Results were consistent when evaluating clinical progression on an individual level 14 days after intervention (OR 1.09; 95% CI 0.46-1.73). No significant differences in length of hospital stay, admission to ICU, frequency of severe adverse events or all-cause mortality during follow-up were found between the intervention and the placebo group. Infusion of convalescent plasma did not influence clinical progression, survival or length of hospitalization in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Adulto , COVID-19/terapia , Hospitalización , Humanos , Inmunización Pasiva/métodos , SARS-CoV-2 , Resultado del Tratamiento , Sueroterapia para COVID-19
3.
Sci Rep ; 12(1): 11151, 2022 07 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2028697

RESUMEN

The diagnosis of COVID-19 is based on detection of SARS-CoV-2 in oro-/nasopharyngel swabs, but due to discomfort and minor risk during the swab procedure, detection of SARS-CoV-2 has been investigated in other biological matrixes. In this proof-of-concept study, individuals with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection performed a daily air sample for five days. Air samples were obtained through a non-invasive electrostatic air sampler. Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA was determined with qRT-PCR. The association of positive samples with different exposures was evaluated through mixed-effect models. We obtained 665 air samples from 111 included participants with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Overall, 52 individuals (46.8%) had at least one positive air sample, and 129 (19.4%) air samples were positive for SARS-CoV-2. Participants with symptoms or a symptom duration ≤ four days had significantly higher odds of having a positive air sample. Cycle threshold values were significantly lower in samples obtained ≤ 4 days from symptom onset. Neither variant of SARS-CoV-2 nor method of air sampling were associated with a positive air sample. We demonstrate that SARS-CoV-2 is detectable in human breath by electrostatic air sampling with the highest detection rate closest to symptom onset. We suggest further evaluation of the air sampling technique to increase sensitivity.


Asunto(s)
Líquidos Corporales , COVID-19 , Líquidos Corporales/química , COVID-19/diagnóstico , Humanos , ARN Viral/genética , SARS-CoV-2
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA