Recovery of severe COVID-19 complicated with cerebral infarction: Considerations on a case report.

RATIONALE: The standardization, individualization, and rationalization of intensive care and treatment for severe patients have improved. However, the combination of corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and cerebral infarction presents new challenges beyond routine nursing care. PATIENT CONCERNS AND DIAGNOSES: This paper examines the rehabilitation nursing of patients with both COVID-19 and cerebral infarction as an example. It is necessary to develop a nursing plan for COVID-19 patients and implement early rehabilitation nursing for cerebral infarction patients. INTERVENTIONS: Timely rehabilitation nursing intervention is essential to enhance treatment outcomes and promote patient rehabilitation. After 20 days of rehabilitation nursing treatment, patients showed significant improvement in visual analogue scale score, drinking test, and upper and lower limb muscle strength. OUTCOMES: Treatment outcomes for complications, motor function, and daily activities also improved significantly. LESSONS: Critical care and rehabilitation specialist care play a positive role in ensuring patient safety and improving their quality of life by adapting measures to local conditions and the timing of care.

Coagulation dysfunction in ICU patients with coronavirus disease 2019 in Wuhan, China: a retrospective observational study of 75 fatal cases.

Coagulation dysfunction in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has not been well described, and the efficacy of anticoagulant therapy is unclear. In this study, we retrospectively reviewed 75 fatal COVID-19 cases who were admitted to the intensive care unit at Jinyintan Hospital (Wuhan, China). The median age of the cases was 67 (62-74) years, and 47 (62.7%) were male. Fifty patients (66.7%) were diagnosed with disseminated intra-vascular coagulation. Approximately 90% of patients had elevated D-dimer and fibrinogen degradation products, which decreased continuously after anticoagulant treatment and was accompanied by elevated albumin (all P<0.05). The median survival time of patients treated with anticoagulant was 9.0 (6.0-14.0) days compared with 7.0 (3.0-10.0) days in patients without anticoagulant therapy (P=0.008). After anticoagulation treatment, C-reactive protein levels decreased (P=0.004), as did high-sensitivity troponin (P=0.018), lactate dehydrogenase (P<0.001), and hydroxybutyrate dehydrogenase (P<0.001). In conclusion, coagulation disorders were widespread among fatal COVID-19 cases. Anticoagulant treatment partially improved hypercoagulability, prolonged median survival time, and may have postponed inflammatory processes and cardiac injury.

A Trial of Lopinavir-Ritonavir in Adults Hospitalized with Severe Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: No therapeutics have yet been proven effective for the treatment of severe illness caused by SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, controlled, open-label trial involving hospitalized adult patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, which causes the respiratory illness Covid-19, and an oxygen saturation (Sao2) of 94% or less while they were breathing ambient air or a ratio of the partial pressure of oxygen (Pao2) to the fraction of inspired oxygen (Fio2) of less than 300 mm Hg. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either lopinavir-ritonavir (400 mg and 100 mg, respectively) twice a day for 14 days, in addition to standard care, or standard care alone. The primary end point was the time to clinical improvement, defined as the time from randomization to either an improvement of two points on a seven-category ordinal scale or discharge from the hospital, whichever came first. RESULTS: A total of 199 patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection underwent randomization; 99 were assigned to the lopinavir-ritonavir group, and 100 to the standard-care group. Treatment with lopinavir-ritonavir was not associated with a difference from standard care in the time to clinical improvement (hazard ratio for clinical improvement, 1.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.95 to 1.80). Mortality at 28 days was similar in the lopinavir-ritonavir group and the standard-care group (19.2% vs. 25.0%; difference, -5.8 percentage points; 95% CI, -17.3 to 5.7). The percentages of patients with detectable viral RNA at various time points were similar. In a modified intention-to-treat analysis, lopinavir-ritonavir led to a median time to clinical improvement that was shorter by 1 day than that observed with standard care (hazard ratio, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.91). Gastrointestinal adverse events were more common in the lopinavir-ritonavir group, but serious adverse events were more common in the standard-care group. Lopinavir-ritonavir treatment was stopped early in 13 patients (13.8%) because of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: In hospitalized adult patients with severe Covid-19, no benefit was observed with lopinavir-ritonavir treatment beyond standard care. Future trials in patients with severe illness may help to confirm or exclude the possibility of a treatment benefit. (Funded by Major Projects of National Science and Technology on New Drug Creation and Development and others; Chinese Clinical Trial Register number, ChiCTR2000029308.).