Effect of 2 Different High-Dose Methylprednisolone Treatments on Clinical Outcomes in Severe COVID-19 Patients.

OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to evaluate and compare the use of 2 different high-dose methylprednisolone posology in treating severe coronavirus disease 2019 pneumonia regarding mortality and recovery time between themselves and against steroidal/ non-steroidal treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Severe coronavirus disease 2019 patients followed up between March 2020 and January 2021 were included. The steroid-free treatment protocol was applied before August 2020 (non-pulse group) and a treatment algorithm containing normal and high doses of methylprednisolone was applied after August 2020 (pulse group). Patients with clinical deterioration under the normal dose of methylprednisolone were administered 250 mg or 1000 mg of methylprednisolone for 3 days. We compared the pulse and non-pulse groups, in addition to pulse subgroups with each other, for clinical outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 138 patients were included, including 36 patients in the non-pulse group and 102 in the pulse group. In the pulse group, 70 patients received 1000 mg/day and 32 received 250 mg/day of high-dose methylprednisolone therapy. In the comparison of pulse and non-pulse patient groups, mortality rate was lower in the pulse group (P < .001), and the time to discharge without oxygen support was shorter. Although the patients in the 250 mg subgroup were older, there was no difference between the 250 mg and 1000 mg subgroups in terms of end of oxygen requirement, discharge with oxygen support, and mortality. In addition, the required time to reach the oxygen-free period in patients discharged without oxygen support was similar in the 2 subgroups, and the majority of patients in both subgroups reached the oxygen-free period on the 20th day after initiating methylprednisolone. CONCLUSION: Since there was no difference in clinical improvement between the use of 250 mg or 1000 mg methylprednisolone in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 infection, 1000 mg methylprednisolone was not required.

Development and validation of COVID-19 associated candidemia score (CAC-Score) in ICU patients.

BACKGROUND: The development of candidemia is a highly fatal condition in severe COVID-19 infection. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to develop a candidemia prediction score in COVID-19 patient based on the patient's clinical characteristics, and healthcare-related factors during intensive care units (ICU) follow-up. PATIENTS/METHODS: Severe COVID-19 patients hospitalised in ICU in Ankara City Hospital during the one-year period (August 15, 2020, and August 15, 2021) were included. After univariate analysis, multivariate analysis was applied using variable selection approach to investigate the effects of variables together and to create a score model for candidemia. Statistically significant factors were included in the development process of candida prediction score. RESULTS: Of 1305 COVID-19 ICU patients, 139 had a candidemia episode. According to the final model, four variables, presence of central venous catheter (CVC) (OR 19.07, CI 8.12-44.8, p < .0001), multifocal colonisation (OR 2.28, CI 1.39-3.72, p 0.001), length of ICU stays ≥14 days (OR 3.62, CI 2.42-5.44, p < .0001) and corticosteroids (OR 0.51, CI 0.34-0.76, p 0.0011) were the only statistically significant independent risk factors for candidemia. Score model was demonstrated by a nomogram, and the risk for candidemia was calculated to be high in patients who scored ≥56 points by using the criteria [CVC = 51, multifocal colonisation = 14, prolonged hospitalisation = 23, no steroid use = 12 points]. The AUC of the score is 0.84 (CI 0.81-0.87). CONCLUSION: We developed and validated an easy-to-use clinical prediction score for candidemia in severe COVID-19 infection. In COVID-19 ICU patients, the risk of candidemia is high if one of the other risk factors is present together with CVC.

Incidence and risk factors for COVID-19 associated candidemia (CAC) in ICU patients.

BACKGROUND: Critically ill COVID-19 patients have a high risk for the development of candidemia due to being exposed to both well-defined classical risk factors and COVID-19-specific risk factors in ICU. OBJECTIVES: In this study, we investigated the incidence of candidemia in critically COVID-19 patients, and the independent risk factors for candidemia. PATIENTS/METHODS: COVID-19 patients hospitalised in ICU during 1-year period (August 2020 to August 2021) were included. Clinical and laboratory characteristics of all COVID-19 patients, applied treatments, and invasive procedures that may predispose to candidemia were recorded. RESULTS: Of 1229 COVID-19 patients, 63 developed candidemia. Candidemia incidence rate was 4.4 episodes per 1000 ICU days. The most common species was Candida albicans (52.3%). Only 37 patients (58.7%) received antifungal therapy. The presence of central venous catheter (OR 4.7, 95% CI 1.8-12.2, p < .005), multifocal candida colonisation (OR 2.7, 95% CI 1.4-5.2, p < .005), a prolonged ICU stay (≥14 days) (OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.08-3-37, p < .05), the absence of chronic lung disease (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.1-0.9, p < .05) and the absence of corticosteroid use (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.14-0.52, p < .0001) were significantly associated with candidemia. CONCLUSIONS: Our study filled the knowledge gap in the literature about the impact of COVID-19-associated risk factors for the development of candidemia. The classical risk factors for candidemia had a significant effect on candidemia, and contrary to expectations, corticosteroids had a protective effect against the development of candidemia. The results of these studies showing interesting effects of corticosteroids in critically ill COVID-19 patients should be confirmed by further studies.

Post-COVID syndrome: A single-center questionnaire study on 1007 participants recovered from COVID-19.

Post recovery manifestations have become another concern in patients who have recovered from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Numerous reports have shown that COVID-19 has a variety of long-term effects on almost all systems including respiratory, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, neurological, psychiatric, and dermatological systems. We aimed to investigate the prevalence and characteristics of the post-COVID syndrome among COVID-19 survivors and to determine the factors associated with persistent symptoms. This prospective study enrolled in patients with COVID-19 followed in hospital or outpatient clinics in Ankara City Hospital. We performed a special questionnaire to inquire about the presence of persistent symptoms beyond 12 weeks from the first diagnosis. Demographic data, comorbid diseases, characteristics of acute COVID-19, presence of persistent symptoms by systems, and knowledge about outpatient clinic visits after recovery were assessed. Of a total of 1007 participants, 39.0% had at least one comorbidity, and 47.5% had persistent symptoms. Fatigue/easy fatigability, myalgia, and loss of weight were the most frequent persistent symptoms (overall 29.3%) followed by respiratory symptoms (25.4%). A total of 235 participants had visited outpatient clinics due to several reasons during the post-COVID-19 period, and 17 of them were hospitalized. Severe acute COVID-19, hospitalization, and presence of comorbidity were independent factors for the development of persistent symptoms. Fully understanding the spectrum of the post-COVID syndrome is essential for appropriate management of all its long-term effects. Our study once again underlined the fact that the prevalence of post-COVID syndrome is higher than expected and concerns many systems, and a multidisciplinary follow-up should be provided to COVID-19 survivors in the post recovery period.