Baricitinib plus Remdesivir for Hospitalized Adults with Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: Severe coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is associated with dysregulated inflammation. The effects of combination treatment with baricitinib, a Janus kinase inhibitor, plus remdesivir are not known. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial evaluating baricitinib plus remdesivir in hospitalized adults with Covid-19. All the patients received remdesivir (≤10 days) and either baricitinib (≤14 days) or placebo (control). The primary outcome was the time to recovery. The key secondary outcome was clinical status at day 15. RESULTS: A total of 1033 patients underwent randomization (with 515 assigned to combination treatment and 518 to control). Patients receiving baricitinib had a median time to recovery of 7 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 6 to 8), as compared with 8 days (95% CI, 7 to 9) with control (rate ratio for recovery, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.32; P = 0.03), and a 30% higher odds of improvement in clinical status at day 15 (odds ratio, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.0 to 1.6). Patients receiving high-flow oxygen or noninvasive ventilation at enrollment had a time to recovery of 10 days with combination treatment and 18 days with control (rate ratio for recovery, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.10 to 2.08). The 28-day mortality was 5.1% in the combination group and 7.8% in the control group (hazard ratio for death, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.39 to 1.09). Serious adverse events were less frequent in the combination group than in the control group (16.0% vs. 21.0%; difference, -5.0 percentage points; 95% CI, -9.8 to -0.3; P = 0.03), as were new infections (5.9% vs. 11.2%; difference, -5.3 percentage points; 95% CI, -8.7 to -1.9; P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Baricitinib plus remdesivir was superior to remdesivir alone in reducing recovery time and accelerating improvement in clinical status among patients with Covid-19, notably among those receiving high-flow oxygen or noninvasive ventilation. The combination was associated with fewer serious adverse events. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04401579.).

Implementation of Inpatient Electronic Consultations During the COVID-19 Crisis and Its Sustainability Beyond the Pandemic: Quality Improvement Study.

BACKGROUND: Limiting in-person contact was a key strategy for controlling the spread of the highly infectious novel coronavirus (COVID-19). To protect patients and staff from the risk of infection while providing continued access to necessary health care services, we implemented a new electronic consultation (e-consult) service that allowed referring providers to receive subspecialty consultations for patients who are hospitalized and do not require in-person evaluation by the specialist. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the impact of implementing e-consults in the inpatient setting to reduce avoidable face-to-face referrals during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This quality improvement study evaluated all inpatient e-consults ordered from July 2020 to December 2022 at the University of California Irvine Medical Center. The impact of e-consults was assessed by evaluating use (eg, number of e-consults ordered), e-consult response times, and outcome of the e-consult requests (eg, resolved electronically or converted to the in-person evaluation of patient). RESULTS: There were 1543 inpatient e-consults ordered across 11 participating specialties. A total of 53.5% (n=826) of requests were addressed electronically, without the need for a formal in-person evaluation of the patient. The median time between ordering an e-consult and a specialist documenting recommendations in an e-consult note was 3.7 (IQR 1.3-8.2) hours across all specialties, contrasted with 7.3 (IQR 3.6-22.0) hours when converted to an in-person consult (P<.001). The monthly volume of e-consult requests increased, coinciding with surges of COVID-19 cases in California. After the peaks of the COVID-19 crisis subsided, the use of inpatient e-consults persisted at a rate well above the precrisis levels. CONCLUSIONS: An inpatient e-consult service was successfully implemented, resulting in fewer unnecessary face-to-face consultations and significant reductions in the response times for consults requested on patients who are hospitalized and do not require an in-person evaluation. Thus, e-consults provided timely, efficient delivery of inpatient consultation services for appropriate problems while minimizing the risk of direct transmission of the COVID-19 virus between health care providers and patients. The service also demonstrated its value as a tool for effective inpatient care coordination beyond the peaks of the pandemic leading to the sustainability of service and value.

Analysis of Veno-Venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for COVID-19 Compared to Non-COVID Etiologies.

OBJECTIVE: This study analyzed the characteristics and outcomes of veno-venous (V-V) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to COVID-19 versus non-COVID causes at US academic centers. BACKGROUND DATA: V-V ECMO support has been utilized for COVID-19 patients with ARDS since the beginning of the pandemic. Mortality for ECMO in COVID-19 has been reported to be high but similar to reported mortality for ECMO support for non-COVID causes of respiratory failure. METHODS: Using ICD-10 codes, data of patients who underwent V-V ECMO for COVID-19 ARDS were compared with patients who underwent V-V ECMO for non-COVID causes between April 2020 and December 2022. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcome measures included length of stay and direct cost. Multivariate logistic regression modeling was performed to analyze differences in mortality between COVID and non-COVID groups, adjusting for other important risk factors (age, sex, and race/ethnicity). RESULTS: We identified and compared 6382 patients who underwent V-V ECMO for non-COVID causes to 6040 patients who underwent V-V ECMO for COVID-19. There was a significantly higher proportion of patients aged ≥ 65 years who underwent V-V ECMO in the non-COVID group compared with the COVID group (19.8% vs. 3.7%, respectively, P <0.001). Compared with patients who underwent V-V ECMO for non-COVID causes, patients who underwent V-V ECMO for COVID had increased in-hospital mortality (47.6% vs. 34.5%, P <0.001), length of stay (46.5±41.1 days vs. 40.6±46.1, P <0.001), and direct hospitalization cost ($207,022±$208,842 vs. $198,508±205,510, P =0.02). Compared with the non-COVID group, the adjusted odds ratio (OR) for in-hospital mortality in the COVID group was 2.03 (95% CI: 1.87-2.20, P <0.001). In-hospital mortality for V-V ECMO in COVID-19 improved during the study time period (50.3% in 2020, 48.6% in 2021, and 37.3% in 2022). However, there was a precipitous drop in the ECMO case volume for COVID starting in quarter 2 of 2022. CONCLUSIONS: In this nationwide analysis, COVID-19 patients with ARDS requiring V-V ECMO support had increased mortality compared with patients who underwent V-V ECMO for non-COVID etiologies.

The Influence of Social Determinants on Receiving Outpatient Treatment with Monoclonal Antibodies, Disease Risk, and Effectiveness for COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Limited research has studied the influence of social determinants of health (SDoH) on the receipt, disease risk, and subsequent effectiveness of neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (nMAbs) for outpatient treatment of COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: To examine the influence of SDoH variables on receiving nMAb treatments and the risk of a poor COVID-19 outcome, as well as nMAb treatment effectiveness across SDoH subgroups. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study utilizing electronic health record data from four health systems. SDoH variables analyzed included race, ethnicity, insurance, marital status, Area Deprivation Index, and population density. PARTICIPANTS: COVID-19 patients who met at least one emergency use authorization criterion for nMAb treatment. MAIN MEASURE: We used binary logistic regression to examine the influence of SDoH variables on receiving nMAb treatments and risk of a poor outcome from COVID-19 and marginal structural models to study treatment effectiveness. RESULTS: The study population included 25,241 (15.1%) nMAb-treated and 141,942 (84.9%) non-treated patients. Black or African American patients were less likely to receive treatment than white non-Hispanic patients (adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 0.86; 95% CI = 0.82-0.91). Patients who were on Medicaid, divorced or widowed, living in rural areas, or living in areas with the highest Area Deprivation Index (most vulnerable) had lower odds of receiving nMAb treatment, but a higher risk of a poor outcome. For example, compared to patients on private insurance, Medicaid patients had 0.89 (95% CI = 0.84-0.93) times the odds of receiving nMAb treatment, but 1.18 (95% CI = 1.13-1.24) times the odds of a poor COVID-19 outcome. Age, comorbidities, and COVID-19 vaccination status had a stronger influence on risk of a poor outcome than SDoH variables. nMAb treatment benefited all SDoH subgroups with lower rates of 14-day hospitalization and 30-day mortality. CONCLUSION: Disparities existed in receiving nMAbs within SDoH subgroups despite the benefit of treatment across subgroups.

Risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity in a health care worker population during the early pandemic.

BACKGROUND: While others have reported severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus 2(SARS-CoV-2) seroprevalence studies in health care workers (HCWs), we leverage the use of a highly sensitive coronavirus antigen microarray to identify a group of seropositive health care workers who were missed by daily symptom screening that was instituted prior to any epidemiologically significant local outbreak. Given that most health care facilities rely on daily symptom screening as the primary method to identify SARS-CoV-2 among health care workers, here, we aim to determine how demographic, occupational, and clinical variables influence SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity among health care workers. METHODS: We designed a cross-sectional survey of HCWs for SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity conducted from May 15th to June 30th 2020 at a 418-bed academic hospital in Orange County, California. From an eligible population of 5,349 HCWs, study participants were recruited in two ways: an open cohort, and a targeted cohort. The open cohort was open to anyone, whereas the targeted cohort that recruited HCWs previously screened for COVID-19 or work in high-risk units. A total of 1,557 HCWs completed the survey and provided specimens, including 1,044 in the open cohort and 513 in the targeted cohort. Demographic, occupational, and clinical variables were surveyed electronically. SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity was assessed using a coronavirus antigen microarray (CoVAM), which measures antibodies against eleven viral antigens to identify prior infection with 98% specificity and 93% sensitivity. RESULTS: Among tested HCWs (n = 1,557), SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity was 10.8%, and risk factors included male gender (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.05-2.06), exposure to COVID-19 outside of work (2.29, 1.14-4.29), working in food or environmental services (4.85, 1.51-14.85), and working in COVID-19 units (ICU: 2.28, 1.29-3.96; ward: 1.59, 1.01-2.48). Amongst 1,103 HCWs not previously screened, seropositivity was 8.0%, and additional risk factors included younger age (1.57, 1.00-2.45) and working in administration (2.69, 1.10-7.10). CONCLUSION: SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity is significantly higher than reported case counts even among HCWs who are meticulously screened. Seropositive HCWs missed by screening were more likely to be younger, work outside direct patient care, or have exposure outside of work.

Implementation, Maintenance, and Outcomes of an Electronic Referral to a Tobacco Quitline Across Five Health Systems.

INTRODUCTION: Electronic referral (e-referral) to quitlines helps connect tobacco-using patients to free, evidence-based cessation counseling. Little has been published about the real-world implementation of e-referrals across U.S. health systems, their maintenance over time, and the outcomes of e-referred patients. AIMS AND METHODS: Beginning in 2014, the University of California (UC)-wide project called UC Quits scaled up quitline e-referrals and related modifications to clinical workflows from one to five UC health systems. Implementation strategies were used to increase site readiness. Maintenance was supported through ongoing monitoring and quality improvement programs. Data on e-referred patients (n = 20 709) and quitline callers (n = 197 377) were collected from April 2014 to March 2021. Analyses of referral trends and cessation outcomes were conducted in 2021-2022. RESULTS: Of 20 709 patients referred, the quitline contacted 47.1%, 20.6% completed intake, 15.2% requested counseling, and 10.9% received it. In the 1.5-year implementation phase, 1813 patients were referred. In the 5.5-year maintenance phase, volume was sustained, with 3436 referrals annually on average. Among referred patients completing intake (n = 4264), 46.2% were nonwhite, 58.8% had Medicaid, 58.7% had a chronic disease, and 48.8% had a behavioral health condition. In a sample randomly selected for follow-up, e-referred patients were as likely as general quitline callers to attempt quitting (68.5% vs. 71.4%; p = .23), quit for 30 days (28.3% vs. 26.9%; p = .52), and quit for 6 months (13.6% vs. 13.9%; p = .88). CONCLUSIONS: With a whole-systems approach, quitline e-referrals can be established and sustained across inpatient and outpatient settings with diverse patient populations. Cessation outcomes were similar to those of general quitline callers. IMPLICATIONS: This study supports the broad implementation of tobacco quitline e-referrals in health care. To the best of our knowledge, no other paper has described the implementation of e-referrals across multiple U.S. health systems or how they were sustained over time. Modifying electronic health records systems and clinical workflows to enable and encourage e-referrals, if implemented and maintained appropriately, can be expected to improve patient care, make it easier for clinicians to support patients in quitting, increase the proportion of patients using evidence-based treatment, provide data to assess progress on quality goals, and help meet reporting requirements for tobacco screening and prevention.

Temporal Improvements in COVID-19 Outcomes for Hospitalized Adults: A Post Hoc Observational Study of Remdesivir Group Participants in the Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 standard of care (SOC) evolved rapidly during 2020 and 2021, but its cumulative effect over time is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether recovery and mortality improved as SOC evolved, using data from ACTT (Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial). DESIGN: ACTT is a series of phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials that evaluated COVID-19 therapeutics from February 2020 through May 2021. ACTT-1 compared remdesivir plus SOC to placebo plus SOC, and in ACTT-2 and ACTT-3, remdesivir plus SOC was the control group. This post hoc analysis compared recovery and mortality between these comparable sequential cohorts of patients who received remdesivir plus SOC, adjusting for baseline characteristics with propensity score weighting. The analysis was repeated for participants in ACTT-3 and ACTT-4 who received remdesivir plus dexamethasone plus SOC. Trends in SOC that could explain outcome improvements were analyzed. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04280705 [ACTT-1], NCT04401579 [ACTT-2], NCT04492475 [ACTT-3], and NCT04640168 [ACTT-4]). SETTING: 94 hospitals in 10 countries (86% U.S. participants). PARTICIPANTS: Adults hospitalized with COVID-19. INTERVENTION: SOC. MEASUREMENTS: 28-day mortality and recovery. RESULTS: Although outcomes were better in ACTT-2 than in ACTT-1, adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were close to 1 (HR for recovery, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.92 to 1.17]; HR for mortality, 0.90 [CI, 0.56 to 1.40]). Comparable patients were less likely to be intubated in ACTT-2 than in ACTT-1 (odds ratio, 0.75 [CI, 0.53 to 0.97]), and hydroxychloroquine use decreased. Outcomes improved from ACTT-2 to ACTT-3 (HR for recovery, 1.43 [CI, 1.24 to 1.64]; HR for mortality, 0.45 [CI, 0.21 to 0.97]). Potential explanatory factors (SOC trends, case surges, and variant trends) were similar between ACTT-2 and ACTT-3, except for increased dexamethasone use (11% to 77%). Outcomes were similar in ACTT-3 and ACTT-4. Antibiotic use decreased gradually across all stages. LIMITATION: Unmeasured confounding. CONCLUSION: Changes in patient composition explained improved outcomes from ACTT-1 to ACTT-2 but not from ACTT-2 to ACTT-3, suggesting improved SOC. These results support excluding nonconcurrent controls from analysis of platform trials in rapidly changing therapeutic areas. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Decolonization to Reduce Postdischarge Infection Risk among MRSA Carriers.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalized patients who are colonized with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) are at high risk for infection after discharge. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial of postdischarge hygiene education, as compared with education plus decolonization, in patients colonized with MRSA (carriers). Decolonization involved chlorhexidine mouthwash, baths or showers with chlorhexidine, and nasal mupirocin for 5 days twice per month for 6 months. Participants were followed for 1 year. The primary outcome was MRSA infection as defined according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) criteria. Secondary outcomes included MRSA infection determined on the basis of clinical judgment, infection from any cause, and infection-related hospitalization. All analyses were performed with the use of proportional-hazards models in the per-protocol population (all participants who underwent randomization, met the inclusion criteria, and survived beyond the recruitment hospitalization) and as-treated population (participants stratified according to adherence). RESULTS: In the per-protocol population, MRSA infection occurred in 98 of 1063 participants (9.2%) in the education group and in 67 of 1058 (6.3%) in the decolonization group; 84.8% of the MRSA infections led to hospitalization. Infection from any cause occurred in 23.7% of the participants in the education group and 19.6% of those in the decolonization group; 85.8% of the infections led to hospitalization. The hazard of MRSA infection was significantly lower in the decolonization group than in the education group (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52 to 0.96; P=0.03; number needed to treat to prevent one infection, 30; 95% CI, 18 to 230); this lower hazard led to a lower risk of hospitalization due to MRSA infection (hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.99). The decolonization group had lower likelihoods of clinically judged infection from any cause (hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.99) and infection-related hospitalization (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.93); treatment effects for secondary outcomes should be interpreted with caution owing to a lack of prespecified adjustment for multiple comparisons. In as-treated analyses, participants in the decolonization group who adhered fully to the regimen had 44% fewer MRSA infections than the education group (hazard ratio, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.86) and had 40% fewer infections from any cause (hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.78). Side effects (all mild) occurred in 4.2% of the participants. CONCLUSIONS: Postdischarge MRSA decolonization with chlorhexidine and mupirocin led to a 30% lower risk of MRSA infection than education alone. (Funded by the AHRQ Healthcare-Associated Infections Program and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01209234 .).

Outcomes and risk factors for delayed-onset postoperative respiratory failure: a multi-center case-control study by the University of California Critical Care Research Collaborative (UC3RC).

BACKGROUND: Few interventions are known to reduce the incidence of respiratory failure that occurs following elective surgery (postoperative respiratory failure; PRF). We previously reported risk factors associated with PRF that occurs within the first 5 days after elective surgery (early PRF; E-PRF); however, PRF that occurs six or more days after elective surgery (late PRF; L-PRF) likely represents a different entity. We hypothesized that L-PRF would be associated with worse outcomes and different risk factors than E-PRF. METHODS: This was a retrospective matched case-control study of 59,073 consecutive adult patients admitted for elective non-cardiac and non-pulmonary surgical procedures at one of five University of California academic medical centers between October 2012 and September 2015. We identified patients with L-PRF, confirmed by surgeon and intensivist subject matter expert review, and matched them 1:1 to patients who did not develop PRF (No-PRF) based on hospital, age, and surgical procedure. We then analyzed risk factors and outcomes associated with L-PRF compared to E-PRF and No-PRF. RESULTS: Among 95 patients with L-PRF, 50.5% were female, 71.6% white, 27.4% Hispanic, and 53.7% Medicare recipients; the median age was 63 years (IQR 56, 70). Compared to 95 matched patients with No-PRF and 319 patients who developed E-PRF, L-PRF was associated with higher morbidity and mortality, longer hospital and intensive care unit length of stay, and increased costs. Compared to No-PRF, factors associated with L-PRF included: preexisiting neurologic disease (OR 4.36, 95% CI 1.81-10.46), anesthesia duration per hour (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.04-1.44), and maximum intraoperative peak inspiratory pressure per cm H20 (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.06-1.22). CONCLUSIONS: We identified that pre-existing neurologic disease, longer duration of anesthesia, and greater maximum intraoperative peak inspiratory pressures were associated with respiratory failure that developed six or more days after elective surgery in adult patients (L-PRF). Interventions targeting these factors may be worthy of future evaluation.

Analysis of COVID-19 Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Managed With Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation at US Academic Centers.

OBJECTIVE: This study analyzed the outcomes of COVID-19 patients with ARDS who were managed with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) across 155 US academic centers. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: ECMO has been utilized in COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and refractory hypoxemia. Early case series with the use of ECMO in these patients reported high mortality exceeding 90%. METHODS: Using ICD-10 codes, data of patients with COVID-19 with ARDS, managed with ECMO between April and September 2020, were analyzed using the Vizient clinical database. Outcomes measured included in-hospital mortality, hospital and ICU length of stay, and direct cost. For comparative purposes, the outcome of a subset of COVID-19 patients aged between 18 and 64 years and managed with versus without ECMO were examined. RESULTS: 1,182 patients with COVID-19 and ARDS received ECMO. In-hospital mortality was 45.9%, mean length of stay was 36.8 ±â€Š24.9 days, and mean ICU stay was 29.1 ±â€Š17.3 days. In-hospital mortality according to age group was 25.2% for 1 to 30 years; 42.2% for 31 to 50 years; 53.2% for 51 to 64 years; and 73.7% for ≥65 years. A subset analysis of COVID-19 patients, aged 18 to 64 years with ARDS requiring mechanical ventilation and managed with (n = 1113) vs without (n = 16,343) ECMO, showed relatively high in-hospital mortality for both groups (44.6% with ECMO vs 37.9% without ECMO). CONCLUSIONS: In this large US study of patients with COVID-19 and ARDS managed with ECMO, the in-hospital mortality is high but much lower than initial reports. Future research is needed to evaluate which patients with COVID-19 and ARDS would benefit from ECMO.

Novel therapeutic approaches for COVID-19 in chronic kidney disease and transplant.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the novel virus responsible for the current worldwide pandemic. The scientific and healthcare communities have made every effort to discover and implement treatment options at a historic pace. Patients with kidney disease are uniquely vulnerable to an infectious pandemic because of their need to be in frequent contact with the healthcare system for life-sustaining renal replacement therapy whether it be by dialysis or transplant. RECENT FINDINGS: The use of targeted viral therapies, extracorporeal therapies, immunosuppressive therapy and public health interventions are important in the management of patients with COVID-19 but require special consideration in patients with kidney disease because of the complexity of their condition. SUMMARY: Here, we discuss some of the major efforts made to prevent spread and emerging treatment options for this virus, as they pertain to patients with kidney disease.

Risk Factors Associated With Early Postoperative Respiratory Failure: A Matched Case-Control Study.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative respiratory failure is the most common serious postoperative pulmonary complication, yet little is known about factors that can reduce its incidence. We sought to elucidate modifiable factors associated with respiratory failure that developed within the first 5 d after an elective operation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Matched case-control study of adults who had an operation at five academic medical centers between October 1, 2012 and September 30, 2015. Cases were identified using administrative data and confirmed via chart review by critical care clinicians. Controls were matched 1:1 to cases based on hospital, age, and surgical procedure. RESULTS: Our total sample (n = 638) was 56.4% female, 71.3% white, and had a median age of 62 y (interquartile range 51, 70). Factors associated with early postoperative respiratory failure included male gender (odds ratio [OR] 1.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12-2.63), American Society of Anesthesiologists class III or greater (OR 2.85, 95% CI 1.74-4.66), greater number of preexisting comorbidities (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.004-1.30), increased operative duration (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.06-1.22), increased intraoperative positive end-expiratory pressure (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.13-1.35) and tidal volume (OR 1.13, 95% CI 1.004-1.27), and greater net fluid balance at 24 h (OR 1.17, 95% CI 1.07-1.28). CONCLUSIONS: We found greater intraoperative ventilator volume and pressure and 24-h fluid balance to be potentially modifiable factors associated with developing early postoperative respiratory failure. Further studies are warranted to independently verify these risk factors, explore their role in development of early postoperative respiratory failure, and potentially evaluate targeted interventions.

Cardiac transplantation in adults with congenital heart disease: A single center case series.

BACKGROUND: Adult congenital heart disease (CHD) transplant recipients historically experienced worse survival early after transplantation. We aim to review updated trends in adult CHD transplantation. METHODS: We performed a single center case series of adult cardiac transplants from January 2013 through July 2020. Outcomes of patients with CHD were compared to non-CHD. The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes included a variety of post-operative complications. RESULTS: 18/262 (7%) transplants were CHD recipients. CHD patients were younger with median age 41 (32-47) versus 58 (48-65) (P < .001). Fontan circulation for single ventricle physiology was present in 4/18 (22%) of CHD recipients, while 16/18 (89%) had systemic right ventricles. CHD recipients had higher rates of previous cardiovascular operations (94% vs. 51%, P < .001). 9/18 (50%) of CHD patients required reconstructive procedures at the time of transplant. Operative and cardiopulmonary bypass times were longer for the CHD cohort (7.5 h [6.6-8.5] vs. 5.6 h [4.6-7] P < .001) and (197 min [158-240] vs. 130 [105-167] P < .001), respectively. There were no differences in operative complications or survival between CHD and non-CHD recipients. CONCLUSIONS: These data highlight the added technical challenges of performing adult CHD transplants. However, similar outcomes can be achieved as for non-CHD recipients. SUMMARY: Modern advances in palliation of congenital heart defects (CHD) has led to increased survival into adulthood. Many of these patients require heart transplantation as adults. There are limited data on adult CHD transplantation. Historically, these patients have had worse perioperative outcomes with improved long-term survival. We retrospectively analyzed 262 heart transplants at a single center, 18 of which were for adult CHD. Here, we report our series of 18 CHD recipients. We detail the palliative history of all CHD patients and highlight the added technical challenges for each of the 18 patients at transplant. In our analysis, CHD patients had more prior cardiovascular surgeries as well as longer transplant operative and bypass times. Despite this, there were no differences in perioperative and long-term outcomes. We have added patient and institution specific data for transplanting patients with adult CHD. We hope that our experience will add to the growing body of literature on adult CHD transplantation.

Continuous glucose monitoring in an end-stage renal disease patient with diabetes receiving hemodialysis.

Diabetes is the leading cause of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and contributes to heightened morbidity and mortality in dialysis patients. Given that ESRD patients are susceptible to hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia via multiple pathways, adequate glycemic monitoring and control is a cornerstone in diabetic kidney disease management. In ESRD, existing glycemic metrics such as glycated hemoglobin, self-monitored blood glucose, fructosamine, and glycated albumin have limitations in accuracy, convenience, and accessibility. In contrast, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) provides automated, less invasive glucose measurements and more comprehensive glycemic data versus conventional metrics. Here, we report a 48-year-old male with ESRD due to diabetes receiving thrice-weekly hemodialysis who experienced decreased patient-burden, greater glucose monitoring adherence, improved glycemic parameters, and reduction in hypoglycemia after transitioning to CGM. Through this case, we discuss how CGM is a practical, convenient patient-centered tool that may improve metabolic outcomes and quality of life in ESRD patients with diabetes.

Personalized Risk Prediction for 30-Day Readmissions With Venous Thromboembolism Using Machine Learning.

PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to develop and validate machine learning models to predict the personalized risk for 30-day readmission with venous thromboembolism (VTE). DESIGN: This study was a retrospective, observational study. METHODS: We extracted and preprocessed the structured electronic health records (EHRs) from a single academic hospital. Then we developed and evaluated three prediction models using logistic regression, the balanced random forest model, and the multilayer perceptron. RESULTS: The study sample included 158,804 total admissions; VTE-positive cases accounted for 2,080 admissions from among 1,695 patients (1.31%). Based on the evaluation results, the balanced random forest model outperformed the other two risk prediction models. CONCLUSIONS: This study delivered a high-performing, validated risk prediction tool using machine learning and EHRs to identify patients at high risk for VTE after discharge. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The risk prediction model developed in this study can potentially guide treatment decisions for discharged patients for better patient outcomes.

Mortality Risk in Chronic Kidney Disease Patients Transitioning to Dialysis: Impact of Opiate and Non-Opiate Use.

BACKGROUND: Population-based studies show there is a high prevalence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients suffering from chronic pain. While opiates are frequently prescribed in non-dialysis-dependent CKD (NDD-CKD) patients, there may be toxic accumulation of metabolites, particularly among those progressing to end-stage renal disease (ESRD). We examined the association of opiate versus other analgesic use during the pre-ESRD period with post-ESRD mortality among NDD-CKD patients transitioning to dialysis. METHODS: We examined a national cohort of US Veterans with NDD-CKD who transitioned to dialysis over 2007-14. Among patients who received ≥1 prescription(s) in the Veterans Affairs (VA) Healthcare System within 1 year of transitioning to dialysis, we examined associations of pre-ESRD analgesic status, defined as opiate, gabapentin/pregabalin, other non-opiate analgesic, versus no analgesic use, with post-ESRD mortality using multivariable Cox models. RESULTS: Among 57,764 patients who met eligibility criteria, pre-ESRD opiate and gabapentin/pregabalin use were each associated with higher post-ESRD mortality (ref: no analgesic use), whereas non-opiate analgesic use was not associated with higher mortality in expanded case-mix analyses: HRs (95% CIs) 1.07 (1.05-1.10), 1.07 (1.01-1.13), and 1.00 (0.94-1.06), respectively. In secondary analyses, increasing frequency of opiate prescriptions exceeding 1 opiate prescription in the 1-year pre-ESRD period was associated with incrementally higher post-ESRD mortality (ref: no analgesic use). CONCLUSIONS: In NDD-CKD patients transitioning to dialysis, pre-ESRD opiate and gabapentin/pregabalin use were associated with higher post-ESRD mortality, whereas non-opiate analgesic use was not associated with death. There was a graded association between increasing frequency of pre-ESRD opiate use and incrementally higher mortality.

A Case of Novel Coronavirus Disease 19 in a Chronic Hemodialysis Patient Presenting with Gastroenteritis and Developing Severe Pulmonary Disease.

Novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a highly infectious, rapidly spreading viral disease with an alarming case fatality rate up to 5%. The risk factors for severe presentations are concentrated in patients with chronic kidney disease, particularly patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) who are dialysis dependent. We report the first US case of a 56-year-old nondiabetic male with ESRD secondary to IgA nephropathy undergoing thrice-weekly maintenance hemodialysis for 3 years, who developed COVID-19 infection. He has hypertension controlled with angiotensin receptor blocker losartan 100 mg/day and coronary artery disease status-post stent placement. During the first 5 days of his febrile disease, he presented to an urgent care, 3 emergency rooms, 1 cardiology clinic, and 2 dialysis centers in California and Utah. During this interval, he reported nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and low-grade fevers but was not suspected of COVID-19 infection until he developed respiratory symptoms and was admitted to the hospital. Imaging studies upon admission were consistent with bilateral interstitial pneumonia. He was placed in droplet-eye precautions while awaiting COVID-19 test results. Within the first 24 h, he deteriorated quickly and developed acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), requiring intubation and increasing respiratory support. Losartan was withheld due to hypotension and septic shock. COVID-19 was reported positive on hospital day 3. He remained in critical condition being treated with hydroxychloroquine and tocilizumab in addition to the standard medical management for septic shock and ARDS. Our case is unique in its atypical initial presentation and highlights the importance of early testing.

Diagnosis of Acute Heart Failure Using Inferior Vena Cava Ultrasound: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The utility of bedside inferior vena cava (IVC) ultrasound (US) in the diagnosis of heart failure (HF) is unclear. The aim of this study was to determine whether IVC parameters in patients with acute heart failure (AHF) are statistically different from those without HF. METHODS: The MEDLINE database of English-language publications from 1966 to August 2018 was searched. Retrospective and prospective studies that included either IVC expiratory diameter (IVCexp ) or IVC collapsibility index (IVC-CI) values were collected in patients with and without HF. to determine whether there was a statistical difference in the IVC parameters between these groups. RESULTS: A total of 27 articles with a total of 1472 patients with AHF were included. The standard mean differences for the IVCexp and IVC-CI for the control group versus the AHF group were found to be statistically significant (P < .0001). The combined mean IVCexp values were 15.11 mm (95% confidence interval [CI], 14.19-16.02 mm) for the control group and 20.26 mm (95% CI, 14.82-25.71 mm) for the AHF group. The combined mean IVC-CI values were 61.6% (95% CI, 48.4%-74.7%) for the control group and 30.5% (95% CI, 26.4%-34.6%) for the AHF group. CONCLUSIONS: Bedside IVC US showed that a statistically significant difference existed in the IVC parameters between patients with and without AHF. Based on mean calculations, an IVCexp of greater than 2.0 cm and an IVC-CI of less than 30% are reasonable cutoffs to suggest that a patient with acute dyspnea is more likely to have AHF than a non-AHF condition. Given the high degree of heterogeneity across the studies and the high risk of bias, larger randomized studies are warranted to explore the use of IVC US in patients with HF.

Real-world comparison of in-hospital Reveal LINQ insertable cardiac monitor insertion inside and outside of the cardiac catheterization or electrophysiology laboratory.

BACKGROUND: Traditionally, insertable cardiac monitor (ICM) procedures have been performed in the cardiac catheterization (CATH) or electrophysiology (EP) laboratory. The introduction of the miniaturized Reveal LINQ ICM has led to simplified and less invasive procedures, affording hospitals flexibility in planning where these procedures occur without compromising patient safety or outcomes. METHODS: The present analysis of the ongoing, prospective, observational, multicenter Reveal LINQ Registry sought to provide real-world feasibility and safety data regarding the ICM procedure performed in the CATH/EP lab or operating room and to compare it with insertions performed outside of these traditional hospital settings. Patients included had at least a 30-day period after the procedure to account for any adverse events. RESULTS: We analyzed 1222 patients (58.1% male, age 61.0 ± 17.1 years) enrolled at 18 centers in the US, 17 centers in Middle East/Asia, and 15 centers in Europe. Patients were categorized into 2 cohorts according to the location of the procedure: in-lab (CATH lab, EP lab, or operating room) (n = 820, 67.1%) and out-of-lab (n = 402, 32.9%). Several differences were observed regarding baseline and procedure characteristics. However, no significant differences in the occurrence of procedure-related adverse events (AEs) were found; of 19 ICM/procedure-related AEs reported in 17 patients (1.4%), 11 occurred in the in-lab group (1.3%) and 6 in the out-of-lab group (1.5%) (P = .80). CONCLUSIONS: This real-world analysis demonstrates the feasibility of performing Reveal LINQ ICM insertion procedures outside of the traditional hospital settings without increasing the risk of infection or other adverse events.

Impact of induction immunosuppression on patient survival in heart transplant recipients treated with tacrolimus and mycophenolic acid in the current allocation era.

BACKGROUND: The practice of induction therapy with either rabbit anti-thymocyte globulin (r-ATG) or interleukin-2 receptor antagonists (IL-2RA) is common among heart transplant recipients. However, its benefits in the setting of contemporary maintenance immunosuppression with tacrolimus/mycophenolic acid (TAC/MPA) are unknown. METHODS: We compared post-transplant mortality among three induction therapy strategies (r-ATG vs IL2-RA vs no induction) in a retrospective cohort analysis of heart transplant recipients maintained on TAC/MPA in the Organ Procurement Transplant Network (OPTN) database between the years 2006 and 2015. We used a multivariable model adjusting for clinically important co-morbidities, and a propensity score analysis using the inverse probability weighted (IPW) method in the final analysis. RESULTS: In multivariable IPW analysis, r-ATG (HR = 1.23; 95% CI = 1.05-1.46, P = 0.01) remained significantly associated with a higher mortality. There was a trend toward having a higher mortality in the IL2-RA (HR = 1.11; 95% CI = 1.00-1.24, P = 0.06) group. Subgroup analyses failed to show a patient survival benefit in using either r-ATG or IL2-RA among any of the subgroups analyzed. CONCLUSION: In this contemporary cohort of heart transplant recipients receiving TAC/MPA, neither r-ATG nor IL2-RA were associated with a survival benefit. On the contrary, adjusted analyses showed a significantly higher mortality in the r-ATG group and a trend toward higher mortality in the IL2-RA group. While caution is needed in interpreting treatment effects in an observational cohort, these data call into question the benefit of induction therapy as a common practice and highlight the need for more studies.