Bubble-PAPR: a phase 1 clinical evaluation of the comfort and perception of a prototype powered air-purifying respirator for use by healthcare workers in an acute hospital setting.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to design and produce a low-cost, ergonomic, hood-integrated powered air-purifying respirator (Bubble-PAPR) for pandemic healthcare use, offering optimal and equitable protection to all staff. We hypothesised that participants would rate Bubble-PAPR more highly than current filtering face piece (FFP3) face mask respiratory protective equipment (RPE) in the domains of comfort, perceived safety and communication. DESIGN: Rapid design and evaluation cycles occurred based on the identified user needs. We conducted diary card and focus group exercises to identify relevant tasks requiring RPE. Lab-based safety standards established against British Standard BS-EN-12941 and EU2016/425 covering materials; inward particulate leakage; breathing resistance; clean air filtration and supply; carbon dioxide elimination; exhalation means and electrical safety. Questionnaire-based usability data from participating front-line healthcare staff before (usual RPE) and after using Bubble-PAPR. SETTING: Overseen by a trial safety committee, evaluation progressed sequentially through laboratory, simulated, low-risk, then high-risk clinical environments of a single tertiary National Health Service hospital. PARTICIPANTS: 15 staff completed diary cards and focus groups. 91 staff from a range of clinical and non-clinical roles completed the study, wearing Bubble-PAPR for a median of 45 min (IQR 30-80 (15-120)). Participants self-reported a range of heights (mean 1.7 m (SD 0.1, range 1.5-2.0)), weights (72.4 kg (16.0, 47-127)) and body mass indices (25.3 (4.7, 16.7-42.9)). OUTCOME MEASURES: Preuse particulometer 'fit testing' and evaluation against standards by an independent biomedical engineer.Primary:Perceived comfort (Likert scale).Secondary: Perceived safety, communication. RESULTS: Mean fit factor 16 961 (10 participants). Bubble-PAPR mean comfort score 5.64 (SD 1.55) vs usual FFP3 2.96 (1.44) (mean difference 2.68 (95% CI 2.23 to 3.14, p<0.001). Secondary outcomes, Bubble-PAPR mean (SD) versus FFP3 mean (SD), (mean difference (95% CI)) were: how safe do you feel? 6.2 (0.9) vs 5.4 (1.0), (0.73 (0.45 to 0.99)); speaking to other staff 7.5 (2.4) vs 5.1 (2.4), (2.38 (1.66 to 3.11)); heard by other staff 7.1 (2.3) vs 4.9 (2.3), (2.16 (1.45 to 2.88)); speaking to patients 7.8 (2.1) vs 4.8 (2.4), (2.99 (2.36 to 3.62)); heard by patients 7.4 (2.4) vs 4.7 (2.5), (2.7 (1.97 to 3.43)); all p<0.01. CONCLUSIONS: Bubble-PAPR achieved its primary purpose of keeping staff safe from airborne particulate material while improving comfort and the user experience when compared with usual FFP3 masks. The design and development of Bubble-PAPR were conducted using a careful evaluation strategy addressing key regulatory and safety steps. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04681365.

Serial SOFA-score trends in ICU-admitted COVID-19 patients as predictor of 28-day mortality: A prospective cohort study.

Background and Aim: The efficacy of Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score as predictor of clinical outcomes among ICU-admitted COVID-19 patients is still controversial. We aimed to assess whether SOFA-score in different time intervals could predict 28-day mortality compared with other well-acknowledged risk factors of COVID-19 mortality. Methods: This observational prospective cohort was conducted on 1057 patients from March 2020 to March 2022 at Masih Daneshvari Hospital, Iran. The univariate and multivariate Cox proportional analysis were performed to assess the hazards of SOFA-score models. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were designed to estimate the predictive values. Results: Mean SOFA-score during first 96 h (HR: 3.82 [CI: 2.75-5.31]), highest SOFA-score (HR: 2.70 [CI: 1.93-3.78]), and initial SOFA-score (HR: 1.65 [CI: 1.30-2.11]) had strongest association with 28-day mortality (p < .0001). In contrast, SOFA scores at 48 and 96 h as well as Δ-SOFA: 48-0 h and Δ-SOFA: 96-0 h did not show significant correlations. Among them, merely mean SOFA-score (HR: 2.28 [CI: 2.21-3.51]; p < .001) remained as independent prognosticator on multivariate regression analysis; though having less odds of predicting value compared with age (HR: 3.81 [CI: 1.98-5.21]), hypertension (HR: 3.11 [CI: 1.26-3.81]), coronary artery disease [CAD] (HR: 2.82 [CI: 1.51-4.8]), and diabetes mellitus (HR: 2.45 [CI: 1.36-2.99]). The area under ROC (AUROC) for mean SOFA-score (0.77) and highest SOFA-score (0.71) were larger than other SOFA intervals. Calculating the first 96 h of SOFA trends, it was obtained that fatality rate was <12.3% if the score dropped, between 28.8% and 46.29% if the score remained unchanged, and >50.45% if the score increased. Conclusion: To predict the 28-day mortality among ICU-admitted COVID-19 patients, mean SOFA upon first 96 h of ICU stay is reliable; while having inadequate accuracy comparing with well-acknowledged COVID-19 mortality predictors (age, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, CAD). Notably, increased SOFA levels in the course of first 96 h of ICU-admission, prognosticate at least 50% fatality regardless of initial SOFA score.

Use of high-flow cannula in pediatric patients with respiratory failure: A prospective cohort study in three high-altitude hospitals.

Background and Aims: Acute respiratory failure (ARF) is a common cause of morbimortality, and a frequent reason for admission to the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU). It requires a high-flow oxygen device as treatment. Our aim is to determine the frequency and main indications for the use of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC), and the prevalence of HFNC failure and its main causes, in three hospitals. Methods: It is a multicenter prospective cohort study, developed in three hospitals in Bogota. Eligible patients were children older than 1 month and younger than 18 years who presented ARF and required management with an HFNC. The study was carried out between April 2020 and December 2021. The follow-up was carried out at 1, 6, and 48 h after starting the management. Results: Of 685 patients included in the study, 296 developed ARF. The prevalence of patients with ARF who required management with HFNC was 48%. The frequency of the pathologies that cause the ARF was: Bronchiolitis was the most frequent pathology (34.5%), followed by asthmatic crisis (15.5%) and pneumonia (12.7%). The average time of use of HFNC was 81.6 h. Regarding treatment failure with HFNC, 15 patients presented torpid evolution and required invasive mechanical ventilation, with a prevalence of therapeutic failure of the HFNC of 10.6%. Conclusion: The use of HFNC is more frequent in patients with bronchiolitis, in children under 2 years of age and in males, which is in line with what has been reported in the literature. In addition, the failure rate of HFNC is low (10.6%), and it may be useful in other pathologies besides bronchiolitis, such as asthma, pneumonia, among others. It opens the possibility to continue evaluating the role of HFNC in pediatric pathology in new studies.

Phase 2 randomised placebo-controlled trial of spironolactone and dexamethasone versus dexamethasone in COVID-19 hospitalised patients in Delhi.

BACKGROUND: In this phase 2 randomised placebo-controlled clinical trial in patients with COVID-19, we hypothesised that blocking mineralocorticoid receptors using a combination of dexamethasone to suppress cortisol secretion and spironolactone is safe and may reduce illness severity. METHODS: Hospitalised patients with confirmed COVID-19 were randomly allocated to low dose oral spironolactone (50 mg day 1, then 25 mg once daily for 21 days) or standard of care in a 2:1 ratio. Both groups received dexamethasone 6 mg daily for 10 days. Group allocation was blinded to the patient and research team. Primary outcomes were time to recovery, defined as the number of days until patients achieved WHO Ordinal Scale (OS) category ≤ 3, and the effect of spironolactone on aldosterone, D-dimer, angiotensin II and Von Willebrand Factor (VWF). RESULTS: One hundred twenty patients with PCR confirmed COVID were recruited in Delhi from 01 February to 30 April 2021. 74 were randomly assigned to spironolactone and dexamethasone (SpiroDex), and 46 to dexamethasone alone (Dex). There was no significant difference in the time to recovery between SpiroDex and Dex groups (SpiroDex median 4.5 days, Dex median 5.5 days, p = 0.055). SpiroDex patients had significantly lower D-dimer levels on days 4 and 7 (day 7 mean D-dimer: SpiroDex 1.15 µg/mL, Dex 3.15 µg/mL, p = 0.0004) and aldosterone at day 7 (SpiroDex 6.8 ng/dL, Dex 14.52 ng/dL, p = 0.0075). There was no difference in VWF or angiotensin II levels between groups. For secondary outcomes, SpiroDex patients had a significantly greater number of oxygen free days and reached oxygen freedom sooner than the Dex group. Cough scores were no different during the acute illness, however the SpiroDex group had lower scores at day 28. There was no difference in corticosteroid levels between groups. There was no increase in adverse events in patients receiving SpiroDex. CONCLUSION: Low dose oral spironolactone in addition to dexamethasone was safe and reduced D-dimer and aldosterone. Time to recovery was not significantly reduced. Phase 3 randomised controlled trials with spironolactone and dexamethasone should be considered. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered on the Clinical Trials Registry of India TRI: CTRI/2021/03/031721, reference: REF/2021/03/041472. Registered on 04/03/2021.

Delayed organising pneumonia in an immunocompromised host after a mild COVID-19 infection.

Organising pneumonia after a mild COVID-19 infection has been increasingly reported and poses a diagnostic challenge to physicians especially in immunocompromised patients. We report a patient with a background of lymphoma in remission on rituximab who presented with prolonged and persistent fever after recovering from a mild COVID-19 infection. The initial workup showed bilateral lower zone lung consolidation; however, the infective and autoimmune workup were unremarkable. Subsequently, a bronchoscopy with transbronchial lung biopsy confirmed the diagnosis of organising pneumonia. A tapering glucocorticoid regimen was commenced with prompt resolution of the patient's clinical symptoms, and subsequent resolution of biochemical markers and radiological lung changes 3 months later. This case highlights the importance of early recognition of the diagnosis of organising pneumonia in immunocompromised populations after a mild COVID-19 infection as it shows promising response to glucocorticoid therapy.

Impact of COVID-19 on carers of children with tracheostomies.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the experiences of caregivers of children with tracheostomies. DESIGN: Qualitative semistructured interviews. SETTING: All participants were currently, or had previously cared for, a tracheostomised child who had attended a tertiary care centre in the North of England. Health professionals were purposively sampled to include accounts from a range of professions from primary, community, secondary and tertiary care. PARTICIPANTS: Carers of children with tracheostomies (n=34), including health professionals (n=17) and parents (n=17). INTERVENTIONS: Interviews were undertaken between July 2020 and February 2021 by telephone or video link. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Qualitative reflexive thematic analysis with QSR NVivo V.12. RESULTS: The pandemic has presented an additional and, for some, substantial challenge when caring for tracheostomised children, but this was not always felt to be the most overriding concern. Interviews demonstrated rapid adaptation, normalisation and varying degrees of stoicism and citizenship around constantly changing pandemic-related requirements, rules and regulations. This paper focuses on four key themes: 'reconceptualising safe care and safe places'; 'disrupted support and isolation'; 'relationships, trust and communication'; and 'coping with uncertainty and shifting boundaries of responsibility'. These are described within the context of the impact on the child, the emotional and physical well-being of carers and the challenges to maintaining the values of family-centred care. CONCLUSIONS: As we move to the next phase of the pandemic, we need to understand the impact on vulnerable groups so that their needs can be prioritised.

Choice of respiratory therapy for COVID-19 patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: a retrospective case series study.

Background: In the treatment of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) due to coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19), physicians choose respiratory management ranging from low-flow oxygen therapy to more invasive methods, depending on the severity of the patient's symptoms. Recently, the ratio of oxygen saturation (ROX) index has been proposed as a clinical indicator to support the decision for either high-flow nasal cannulation (HFNC) or mechanical ventilation (MV). However, the reported cut-off value of the ROX index ranges widely from 2.7 to 5.9. The objective of this study was to identify indices to achieve empirical physician decisions for MV initiation, providing insights to shorten the delay from HFNC to MV. We retrospectively analyzed the ROX index 6 hours after initiating HFNC and lung infiltration volume (LIV) calculated from chest computed tomography (CT) images in COVID-19 patients with AHRF. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the data for 59 COVID-19 patients with AHRF in our facility to determine the cut-off value of the ROX index for respiratory therapeutic decisions and the significance of radiological evaluation of pneumonia severity. The physicians chose either HFNC or MV, and the outcomes were retrospectively analyzed using the ROX index for initiating HFNC. LIV was calculated using chest CT images at admission. Results: Among the 59 patients who required high-flow oxygen therapy with HFNC at admission, 24 were later transitioned to MV; the remaining 35 patients recovered. Four of the 24 patients in the MV group died, and the ROX index values of these patients were 9.8, 7.3, 5.4, and 3.0, respectively. These index values indicated that the ROX index of half of the patients who died was higher than the reported cut-off values of the ROX index, which range from 2.7-5.99. The cut-off value of the ROX index 6 hours after the start of HFNC, which was used to classify the management of HFNC or MV as a physician's clinical decision, was approximately 6.1. The LIV cut-off value on chest CT between HFNC and MV was 35.5%. Using both the ROX index and LIV, the cut-off classifying HFNC or MV was obtained using the equation, LIV = 4.26 × (ROX index) + 7.89. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, as an evaluation metric of the classification, improved to 0.94 with a sensitivity of 0.79 and specificity of 0.91 using both the ROX index and LIV. Conclusion: Physicians' empirical decisions associated with the choice of respiratory therapy for HFNC oxygen therapy or MV can be supported by the combination of the ROX index and the LIV index calculated from chest CT images.

Demultiplexing Ig repertoires by parallel mRNA/DNA sequencing shows major differential alterations in severe COVID-19.

To understand the fine differential elements that can lead to or prevent acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in COVID-19 patients, it is crucial to investigate the immune response architecture. We herein dissected the multiple layers of B cell responses by flow cytometry and Ig repertoire analysis from acute phase to recovery. Flow cytometry with FlowSOM analysis showed major changes associated with COVID-19 inflammation such as an increase of double-negative B-cells and ongoing plasma cell differentiation. This paralleled COVID-19-driven expansion of two disconnected B-cell repertoires. Demultiplexing successive DNA and RNA Ig repertoire patterns characterized an early expansion of IgG1 clonotypes with atypically long and uncharged CDR3, the abundance of this inflammatory repertoire being correlated with ARDS and likely pejorative. A superimposed convergent response included convergent anti-SARS-CoV-2 clonotypes. It featured progressively increasing somatic hypermutation together with normal-length or short CDR3 and it persisted until a quiescent memory B-cell stage after recovery.

Electrolyte imbalances as poor prognostic markers in COVID-19: a systemic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Serum electrolyte imbalances are highly prevalent in COVID-19 patients. However, their associations with COVID-19 outcomes are inconsistent, and of unknown prognostic value. We aim to systematically clarify the associations and prognostic accuracy of electrolyte imbalances (sodium, calcium, potassium, magnesium, chloride and phosphate) in predicting poor COVID-19 clinical outcome. METHODS: PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched. Odds of poor clinical outcome (a composite of mortality, intensive-care unit (ICU) admission, need for respiratory support and acute respiratory distress syndrome) were pooled using mixed-effects models. The associated prognostic sensitivity, positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR + , LR-) and predictive values (PPV, NPV; assuming 25% pre-test probability), and area under the curve (AUC) were computed. RESULTS: We included 28 observational studies from 953 records with low to moderate risk-of-bias. Hyponatremia (OR = 2.08, 95% CI = 1.48-2.94, I2 = 93%, N = 8), hypernatremia (OR = 4.32, 95% CI = 3.17-5.88, I2 = 45%, N = 7) and hypocalcemia (OR = 3.31, 95% CI = 2.24-4.88, I2 = 25%, N = 6) were associated with poor COVID-19 outcome. These associations remained significant on adjustment for covariates such as demographics and comorbidities. Hypernatremia was 97% specific in predicting poor outcome (LR + 4.0, PPV = 55%, AUC = 0.80) despite no differences in CRP and IL-6 levels between hypernatremic and normonatremic patients. Hypocalcemia was 76% sensitive in predicting poor outcome (LR- 0.44, NPV = 87%, AUC = 0.71). Overall quality of evidence ranged from very low to moderate. CONCLUSION: Hyponatremia, hypernatremia and hypocalcemia are associated with poor COVID-19 clinical outcome. Hypernatremia is 97% specific for a poor outcome, and the association is independent of inflammatory marker levels. Further studies should evaluate if correcting these imbalances help improve clinical outcome.

Teleconsultation in respiratory medicine - A position paper of the Portuguese Pulmonology Society.

The COVID-19 pandemic crisis, among so many social, economic and health problems, also brought new opportunities. The potential of telemedicine to improve health outcomes had already been recognised in the last decades, but the pandemic crisis has accelerated the digital revolution. In 2020, a rapid increase in the use of remote consultations occurred due to the need to reduce attendance and overcrowding in outpatient clinics. However, the benefit of their use extends beyond the pandemic crisis, as an important tool to improve both the efficiency and capacity of future healthcare systems. This article reviews the literature regarding telemedicine and teleconsultation standards and recommendations, collects opinions of Portuguese experts in respiratory medicine and provides guidance in teleconsultation practices for Pulmonologists.

Secondary subcutaneous abscess due to mixed infections by Peptoniphilus olsenii and Gleimia europaea after COVID-19.

This report described a rare case of subcutaneous anaerobic bacterial abscess due to Peptoniphilus olsenii and Gleimia europaea after COVID-19. The patient received incision and drainage of the abscess and antibiotics, thereby achieving recovery. Immunodeficiency related to COVID-19 and its treatment might contribute to secondary skin and subcutaneous bacterial infections.

Fibrinolytic therapy in patients with COVID-19 and ARDS: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: In COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), the clot play a role in gas exchange abnormalities. Fibrinolytic therapy can improve alveolar ventilation by restoring blood flow. In this systematic review and meta-analysis protocol, we aim to assess the safety and efficacy of fibrinolytic therapy in such a population. METHODS: We will perform a systematic search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL and LILACS databases without language restrictions for relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs. Two review authors will independently perform data extraction and quality assessments of data from included studies. In case of divergence, a third author will be contacted. The Cochrane handbook will be used for guidance. If the results are not appropriate for a meta-analysis, a descriptive analysis will be performed. DISCUSSION: This systematic review and meta-analysis protocol will provide current evidence about the safety and efficacy of fibrinolytic therapy in patients with COVID-19 and ARDS. These findings will provide if fibrinolytic therapy might be an option for a desperate clinical setting, where all medical efforts have been used. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42020187482. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics committee approval is not necessary. We intend to update the public registry, report any protocol amendments and publish the results in a widely accessible journal.

Real-world effectiveness of casirivimab and imdevimab among patients diagnosed with COVID-19 in the ambulatory setting: a retrospective cohort study using a large claims database.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the real-world effectiveness of casirivimab and imdevimab (CAS+IMD) versus no COVID-19 antibody treatment among patients diagnosed with COVID-19 in the ambulatory setting, including patients diagnosed during the Delta-dominant period prior to Omicron emergence. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Komodo Health closed claims database. PARTICIPANTS: 13 273 128 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 (December 2020 through September 2021) were treated with CAS+IMD or untreated but treatment eligible under the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). Each treated patient was exact and propensity score matched without replacement to up to five untreated EUA-eligible patients. INTERVENTIONS: CAS+IMD. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Composite endpoint of 30-day all-cause mortality or COVID-19-related hospitalisation. Kaplan-Meier estimators were used to calculate outcome risks overall and across subgroups: age, COVID-19 vaccination status, immunocompromised status, and timing of diagnosis (December 2020 to June 2021, and July to September 2021). Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate adjusted HRs (aHRs) and 95% CIs. RESULTS: Among 75 159 CAS+IMD-treated and 1 670 338 EUA-eligible untreated patients, 73 759 treated patients were matched to 310 688 untreated patients; matched patients were ~50 years, ~60% were women and generally well balanced across risk factors. The 30-day risk of the composite outcome was 2.1% and 5.2% in the CAS+IMD-treated and CAS+IMD-untreated patients, respectively; equivalent to a 60% lower risk (aHR 0.40; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.42). The effect of CAS+IMD was consistent across subgroups, including those who received a COVID-19 vaccine (aHR 0.48, 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.56), and those diagnosed during the Delta-dominant period (aHR 0.40, 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.42). CONCLUSIONS: The real-world effectiveness of CAS+IMD is consistent with the efficacy for reducing all-cause mortality or COVID-19-related hospitalisation reported in clinical trials. Effectiveness is maintained across patient subgroups, including those prone to breakthrough infections, and was effective against susceptible variants including Delta. .

Cognitive Deficits among Individuals Admitted to a Post-Acute Pneumological Rehabilitation Unit in Southern Italy after COVID-19 Infection.

(1) Background: We investigated the differences in the neuropsychological profile as well as the pneumological and motor functions in two groups of patients admitted to rehabilitation who received different respiratory support during their COVID-19 infection. (2) Methods: Group-1 (n = 18; 15 male, median age 67.5) consisted of patients who received non-invasive mechanical ventilation; Group-2 (n = 19; 16 male, median age 63) consisted of patients who received invasive mechanical ventilation. All patients underwent a neuropsychological assessment including Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB), and the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (R-BANS) to evaluate the patients' cognition. Depression and anxiety were also measured at admission and discharge to rehabilitation. (3) Results: At admission, patients impaired at MMSE were 44% in Group-1 and 5% in Group-2, while patients impaired at FAB were 88% in Group-1 and 26% in Group-2. Wilcoxon's effect size revealed meaningful differences between groups for FAB, R-BANS global score, immediate and delayed memory, and attention-coding task, with Group-2 performing better than Group-1 across all measures. At discharge, 52% of the 25 patients re-assessed still had mild to moderate cognitive deficits, while 19% had depression and 35% had anxiety. (4) Conclusions: Patients who received oxygen therapy experienced higher levels of acute and chronic stress compared to those who benefitted from invasive mechanical ventilation. Despite patients showing a meaningful improvement at discharge, cognitive impairment persisted in a great number of patients; therefore, long-term neuropsychological follow-up and treatment for COVID-19 patients are recommended.

Comparison of COVID-19 survival in relation to CPAP length of treatment and by comorbidity and transmission setting (community or hospital acquired) in a medium-sized UK hospital in 2020: a retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) length of treatment effect on survival of hospitalised COVID-19 patients in a medium-sized UK Hospital, and how this effect changes according to the patient's comorbidity and COVID-19 route of acquisition (community or nosocomial) during the two waves in 2020. SETTING: The acute inpatient unit in Wrightington, Wigan and Leigh Teaching Hospitals National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust (WWL), a medium-sized NHS Trust in north-west of England. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort of all confirmed COVID-19 patients admitted in WWL during 2020. PARTICIPANTS: 1830 patients (568 first wave, 1262 s wave) with antigen confirmed COVID-19 disease and severe acute respiratory syndrome admitted between 17 March 2020 (first confirmed COVID-19 case) and 31 December 2020. OUTCOME MEASURE: COVID-19 survival rate in all patients and survival rate in potentially hospital-acquired COVID-19 (PHA) patients were modelled using a predictor set which include comorbidities (eg, obesity, diabetes, chronic ischaemic heart disease (IHD), chronic kidney disease (CKD), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)), wave, age, sex and care home residency, and interventions (remdesivir, dexamethasone, CPAP, intensive care unit (ICU), intubation). Secondary outcome measure was CPAP length, which was modelled using the same predictors of the survival rate. RESULTS: Mortality rate in the second wave was significantly lower than in the first wave (43.4% vs 28.1%, p<0.001), although for PHA COVID-19 patients mortality did not reduce, remaining at very high levels independently of wave and CPAP length. For all cohort, statistical modelling identified CPAP length (HR 95% CI 0.86 to 0.96) and women (HR 95% CI 0.71 to 0.81) were associated with improved survival, while being older age (HR 95% CI 1.02 to 1.03) admitted from care homes (HR 95% CI 2.22 to 2.39), IHD (HR 95% CI 1.13 to 1.24), CKD (HR 95% CI 1.14 to 1.25), obesity (HR 95% CI 1.18 to 1.28) and COPD-emphysema (HR 95% CI 1.18 to 1.57) were associated with reduced survival. Despite the detrimental effect of comorbidities, patients with CKD (95% CI 16% to 30% improvement in survival), IHD (95% CI 1% to 10% improvement in survival) and asthma (95% CI 8% to 30% improvement in survival) benefitted most from CPAP length, while no significant survival difference was found for obese and patients with diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: The experience of an Acute Trust during the COVID-19 outbreak of 2020 is documented and indicates the importance of care home and hospitals in disease acquisition. Death rates fell between the first and second wave only for community-acquired COVID-19 patients. The fall was associated to CPAP length, especially for some comorbidities. While uncovering some risk and protective factors of mortality in COVID-19 studies, the study also unravels how little is known about PHA COVID-19 and the interaction between CPAP and some comorbidities.

Hyperbaric oxygen for treatment of long COVID-19 syndrome (HOT-LoCO): protocol for a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase II clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Long COVID-19, where symptoms persist 12 weeks after the initial SARS-CoV-2-infection, is a substantial problem for individuals and society in the surge of the pandemic. Common symptoms are fatigue, postexertional malaise and cognitive dysfunction. There is currently no effective treatment and the underlying mechanisms are unknown, although several hypotheses exist, with chronic inflammation as a common denominator. In prospective studies, hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) has been suggested to be effective for the treatment of similar syndromes such as chronic fatigue syndrome and fibromyalgia. A case series has suggested positive effects of HBOT in long COVID-19. This randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trial will explore HBOT as a potential treatment for long COVID-19. The primary objective is to evaluate if HBOT improves health-related quality of life (HRQoL) for patients with long COVID-19 compared with placebo/sham. The main secondary objective is to evaluate whether HBOT improves endothelial function, objective physical performance and short-term HRQoL. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase II clinical trial in 80 previously healthy subjects debilitated due to long COVID-19, with low HRQoL. Clinical data, HRQoL questionnaires, blood samples, objective tests and activity metre data will be collected at baseline. Subjects will be randomised to a maximum of 10 treatments with hyperbaric oxygen or sham treatment over 6 weeks. Assessments for safety and efficacy will be performed at 6, 13, 26 and 52 weeks, with the primary endpoint (physical domains in RAND 36-Item Health Survey) and main secondary endpoints defined at 13 weeks after baseline. Data will be reviewed by an independent data safety monitoring board. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial is approved by the Swedish National Institutional Review Board (2021-02634) and the Swedish Medical Products Agency (5.1-2020-36673). Positive, negative and inconclusive results will be published in peer-reviewed scientific journals with open access. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04842448.

MRI-negative myelitis associated with cerebral venous thrombosis after COVID-19 infection.

Transverse myelitis and cerebral venous thrombosis represent some of the described neurological complications of coronavirus disease. A woman in her early 30s presented with headache, left-sided sensory symptoms and voiding difficulty. The patient also reported dry cough, fever, nasal congestion, anosmia and ageusia 2 weeks before presentation. The clinical examination showed sensory disturbances on the left side of the body, starting from the lower abdomen and extending to the left leg, which was consistent with transverse myelitis. The laboratory assessment confirmed a previous infection with coronavirus disease and excluded autoimmune entities. Radiological investigations revealed left transverse sinus thrombosis with no spinal cord abnormalities. The treatment was started with therapeutic anticoagulation and intravenous high-dose steroids. The patient showed significant improvement, and the neurological deficits resolved after 3 months. This is the first documented case of imaging-negative myelitis associated with cerebral venous thrombosis after coronavirus disease.

Contribution of COVID-19 to the Total Cases of Pulmonary Embolism and the Potential Risk Factors: Single Academic Hospital Study.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data regarding potential triggering factors of pulmonary embolism (PE) in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients and its outcomes in comparison with non-infected PE patients. We aimed to identify the contribution of COVID-19 among patients diagnosed with PE and compare risk factors, laboratory results, and outcomes between COVID-19 PE patients and non-COVID-19 PE patients. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of all PE patients between March 2020 and December 2020. The patients were segmented into two groups based on a COVID-19 nasopharyngeal swab result. Statistical analysis was used to determine the differences in risk factors, laboratory values, and outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 58 patients were included. Females comprised 44.8% of the total sample. Overall, 16 patients (27.6%) were COVID-19 positive. Being non-Saudi was observed more in PE COVID-19 patients compared with non-COVID-19 patients (43.7% vs 4.8%, P = 0.001). Intensive care unit (ICU) admission occurred in 50% of COVID-19 PE patients. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 was associated with 27.6% of the PEs in our hospital. Being male or a foreign resident was observed to be associated with COVID-19 PE. Further studies with larger sample sizes are needed, but these results may help the medical community regarding the increased risk of PE among COVID-19 patients and provide evidence of some potentially predictive factors that can be used to identify COVID-19 in high-risk patients.