A comprehensive physical functional assessment of survivors of critical care unit stay due to COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the physical function and respiratory muscle strength of patients - who recovered from critical COVID-19 - after intensive care unit discharge to the ward on Days one (D1) and seven (D7), and to investigate variables associated with functional impairment. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study of adult patients with COVID-19 who needed invasive mechanical ventilation, non-invasive ventilation or high-flow nasal cannula and were discharged from the intensive care unit to the ward. Participants were submitted to Medical Research Council sum-score, handgrip strength, maximal inspiratory pressure, maximal expiratory pressure, and short physical performance battery tests. Participants were grouped into two groups according to their need for invasive ventilation: the Invasive Mechanical Ventilation Group (IMV Group) and the Non-Invasive Mechanical Ventilation Group (Non-IMV Group). RESULTS: Patients in the IMV Group (n = 31) were younger and had higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores than those in the Non-IMV Group (n = 33). The short physical performance battery scores (range 0 - 12) on D1 and D7 were 6.1 ± 4.3 and 7.3 ± 3.8, respectively for the Non-Invasive Mechanical Ventilation Group, and 1.3 ± 2.5 and 2.6 ± 3.7, respectively for the IMV Group. The prevalence of intensive care unit-acquired weakness on D7 was 13% for the Non-IMV Group and 72% for the IMV Group. The maximal inspiratory pressure, maximal expiratory pressure, and handgrip strength increased on D7 in both groups, but the maximal expiratory pressure and handgrip strength were still weak. Only maximal inspiratory pressure was recovered (i.e., > 80% of the predicted value) in the Non-IMV Group. Female sex, and the need and duration of invasive mechanical were independently and negatively associated with the short physical performance battery score and handgrip strength. CONCLUSION: Patients who recovered from critical COVID-19 and who received invasive mechanical ventilation presented greater disability than those who were not invasively ventilated. However, they both showed marginal functional improvement during early recovery, regardless of the need for invasive mechanical ventilation. This might highlight the severity of disability caused by SARS-CoV-2.

The II Brazilian Guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 Joint Guidelines of the Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência, Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, Associação Médica Brasileira, Sociedade Brasileira de Angiologia e Cirurgia Vascular, Sociedade Brasileira de Infectologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia and Sociedade Brasileira de Reumatologia.

OBJECTIVE: To update the recommendations to support decisions regarding the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Brazil. METHODS: Experts, including representatives of the Ministry of Health and methodologists, created this guideline. The method used for the rapid development of guidelines was based on the adoption and/or adaptation of existing international guidelines (GRADE ADOLOPMENT) and supported by the e-COVID-19 RecMap platform. The quality of the evidence and the preparation of the recommendations followed the GRADE method. RESULTS: Twenty-one recommendations were generated, including strong recommendations for the use of corticosteroids in patients using supplemental oxygen and conditional recommendations for the use of tocilizumab and baricitinib for patients on supplemental oxygen or on noninvasive ventilation and anticoagulants to prevent thromboembolism. Due to suspension of use authorization, it was not possible to make recommendations regarding the use of casirivimab + imdevimab. Strong recommendations against the use of azithromycin in patients without suspected bacterial infection, hydroxychloroquine, convalescent plasma, colchicine, and lopinavir + ritonavir and conditional recommendations against the use of ivermectin and remdesivir were made. CONCLUSION: New recommendations for the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were generated, such as those for tocilizumab and baricitinib. Corticosteroids and prophylaxis for thromboembolism are still recommended, the latter with conditional recommendation. Several drugs were considered ineffective and should not be used to provide the best treatment according to the principles of evidence-based medicine and to promote resource economy.

Ambulation capacity, age, immunosuppression, and mechanical ventilation are risk factors of in-hospital death in severe COVID-19: a cohort study.

IMPORTANCE: Despite ambulation capacity being associated with a decreased level of physical activity and survival may be influenced by the functional capacity, studies have not addressed the association between ambulation capacity and death in patients hospitalized by COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: To verify the functional, clinical, and sociodemographic risk factors associated with in-hospital death in individuals with severe COVID-19. METHODS: It is a cohort retrospective study performed at a large tertiary hospital. Patients 18 years of age or more, of both sexes, hospitalized due to severe COVID-19 were included. Cases with dubious medical records and/or missing essential data were excluded. Patients were classified according to their ambulation capacity before the COVID-19 infection. Information regarding sociodemographic characteristics, in-hospital death, total hospital stays, Intensive Care Unit (ICU) stays, and the necessity of Mechanical Ventilation (MV) were collected from medical records and registered in a RedCap database. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to identify possible factors associated with the in-hospital death rate. RESULTS: Data from 1110 participants were included in the statistical analysis. The median age of the patients was 57 (46‒66) years, 58.42% (n = 590) were male, and 61.73% (n = 602) were brown or black. The case fatality rate during hospitalization was 36.0% (n = 363). In-hospital death was associated with ambulation capacity; dependent ambulators (OR = 2.3; CI 95% = 1.2-4.4) and non-functional ambulation (OR = 1.9; CI 95% = 1.1-3.3), age [older adults (OR = 3.0; CI 95% = 1.9‒4.), ICU stays (OR = 1.4; CI 95% = 1.2‒1.4), immunosuppression (OR = 5.5 CI 95% = 2.3‒13.5) and mechanical ventilation (OR = 27.5; CI 95% = 12.0-62.9). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Decreased ambulation capacity, age, length of ICU stay, immunosuppression, and mechanical ventilation was associated with a high risk of in-hospital death due to COVID-19.

Clinical outcomes and lung mechanics characteristics between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome: a propensity score analysis of two major randomized trials. / Desfechos clínicos e características da mecânica pulmonar entre a síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo associada à COVID-19 e a não associada à COVID-19: uma análise de escore de propensão de dois importantes ensaios randomizados.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the lung mechanics and outcomes between COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome and non-COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome. METHODS: We combined data from two randomized trials in acute respiratory distress syndrome, one including only COVID-19 patients and the other including only patients without COVID-19, to determine whether COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome is associated with higher 28-day mortality than non-COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome and to examine the differences in lung mechanics between these two types of acute respiratory distress syndrome. RESULTS: A total of 299 patients with COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome and 1,010 patients with non-COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome were included in the main analysis. The results showed that non-COVID-19 patients used higher positive end-expiratory pressure (12.5cmH2O; SD 3.2 versus 11.7cmH2O SD 2.8; p < 0.001), were ventilated with lower tidal volumes (5.8mL/kg; SD 1.0 versus 6.5mL/kg; SD 1.2; p < 0.001) and had lower static respiratory compliance adjusted for ideal body weight (0.5mL/cmH2O/kg; SD 0.3 versus 0.6mL/cmH2O/kg; SD 0.3; p = 0.01). There was no difference between groups in 28-day mortality (52.3% versus 58.9%; p = 0.52) or mechanical ventilation duration in the first 28 days among survivors (13 [IQR 5 - 22] versus 12 [IQR 6 - 26], p = 0.46). CONCLUSION: This analysis showed that patients with non-COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome have different lung mechanics but similar outcomes to COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome patients. After propensity score matching, there was no difference in lung mechanics or outcomes between groups.

OBJETIVO: Comparar a mecânica pulmonar e os desfechos entre a síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo associada à COVID-19 e a síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo não associada à COVID-19. MÉTODOS: Combinamos dados de dois ensaios randomizados sobre a síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo, um incluindo apenas pacientes com COVID-19 e o outro incluindo apenas pacientes sem COVID-19, para determinar se a síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo associada à COVID-19 está associada à maior mortalidade aos 28 dias do que a síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo não associada à COVID-19 e também examinar as diferenças na mecânica pulmonar entre esses dois tipos de síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo. RESULTADOS: Foram incluídos na análise principal 299 pacientes com síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo associada à COVID-19 e 1.010 pacientes com síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo não associada à COVID-19. Os resultados mostraram que os pacientes sem COVID-19 utilizaram pressão positiva expiratória final mais alta (12,5cmH2O; DP 3,2 versus 11,7cmH2O; DP 2,8; p < 0,001), foram ventilados com volumes correntes mais baixos (5,8mL/kg; DP 1,0 versus 6,5mL/kg; DP 1,2; p < 0,001) e apresentaram menor complacência respiratória estática ajustada para o peso ideal (0,5mL/cmH2O/kg; DP 0,3 versus 0,6mL/cmH2O/kg; DP 0,3; p = 0,01). Não houve diferença entre os grupos quanto à mortalidade aos 28 dias (52,3% versus 58,9%; p = 0,52) ou à duração da ventilação mecânica nos primeiros 28 dias entre os sobreviventes (13 [IQ 5 - 22] dias versus 12 [IQ 6 - 26] dias; p = 0,46). CONCLUSÃO: Esta análise mostrou que os pacientes com síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo não associada à COVID-19 têm mecânica pulmonar diferente, mas desfechos semelhantes aos dos pacientes com síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo associada à COVID-19. Após pareamento por escore de propensão, não houve diferença na mecânica pulmonar e nem nos desfechos entre os grupos.

Brazilian Guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19: Joint guideline of Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência, Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, Associação Médica Brasileira, Sociedade Brasileira de Angiologia e Cirurgia Vascular, Sociedade Brasileira de Infectologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Reumatologia. / Diretrizes Brasileiras para o tratamento farmacológico de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19: Diretriz conjunta da Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência, Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, Associação Médica Brasileira, Sociedade Brasileira de Angiologia e Cirurgia Vascular, Sociedade Brasileira de Infectologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia e Sociedade Brasileira de Reumatologia.

OBJECTIVE: Several therapies are being used or proposed for COVID-19, and many lack appropriate evaluations of their effectiveness and safety. The purpose of this document is to develop recommendations to support decisions regarding the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Brazil. METHODS: A group of 27 experts, including representatives of the Ministry of Health and methodologists, created this guideline. The method used for the rapid development of guidelines was based on the adoption and/or adaptation of existing international guidelines (GRADE ADOLOPMENT) and supported by the e-COVID-19 RecMap platform. The quality of the evidence and the preparation of the recommendations followed the GRADE method. RESULTS: Sixteen recommendations were generated. They include strong recommendations for the use of corticosteroids in patients using supplemental oxygen, the use of anticoagulants at prophylactic doses to prevent thromboembolism and the nonuse of antibiotics in patients without suspected bacterial infection. It was not possible to make a recommendation regarding the use of tocilizumab in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 using oxygen due to uncertainties regarding the availability of and access to the drug. Strong recommendations against the use of hydroxychloroquine, convalescent plasma, colchicine, lopinavir + ritonavir and antibiotics in patients without suspected bacterial infection and also conditional recommendations against the use of casirivimab + imdevimab, ivermectin and rendesivir were made. CONCLUSION: To date, few therapies have proven effective in the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19, and only corticosteroids and prophylaxis for thromboembolism are recommended. Several drugs were considered ineffective and should not be used to provide the best treatment according to the principles of evidence-based medicine and promote economical resource use.

OBJETIVOS: Há diversas terapias sendo utilizadas ou propostas para a COVID-19, muitas carecendo de apropriada avaliação de efetividade e segurança. O propósito deste documento é elaborar recomendações para subsidiar decisões sobre o tratamento farmacológico de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 no Brasil. MÉTODOS: Um grupo de 27 membros, formado por especialistas, representantes do Ministério da Saúde e metodologistas, integra essa diretriz. Foi utilizado o método de elaboração de diretrizes rápidas, tomando por base a adoção e/ou a adaptação de recomendações a partir de diretrizes internacionais existentes (GRADE ADOLOPMENT), apoiadas pela plataforma e-COVID-19 RecMap. A qualidade das evidências e a elaboração das recomendações seguiram o método GRADE. RESULTADOS: Foram geradas 16 recomendações. Entre elas, estão recomendações fortes para o uso de corticosteroides em pacientes em uso de oxigênio suplementar, para o uso de anticoagulantes em doses de profilaxia para tromboembolismo e para não uso de antibacterianos nos pacientes sem suspeita de infecção bacteriana. Não foi possível fazer uma recomendação quanto à utilização do tocilizumabe em pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 em uso de oxigênio, pelas incertezas na disponibilidade e de acesso ao medicamento. Foi feita recomendação para não usar azitromicina, casirivimabe + imdevimabe, cloroquina, colchicina, hidroxicloroquina, ivermectina, lopinavir/ ritonavir, plasma convalescente e rendesivir. CONCLUSÃO: Até o momento, poucas terapias se provaram efetivas no tratamento do paciente hospitalizado com COVID-19, sendo recomendados apenas corticosteroides e profilaxia para tromboembolismo. Diversos medicamentos foram considerados ineficazes, devendo ser descartados, de forma a oferecer o melhor tratamento pelos princípios da medicina baseada em evidências e promover economia de recursos não eficazes.

Post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC): a protocol for a multidisciplinary prospective observational evaluation of a cohort of patients surviving hospitalisation in Sao Paulo, Brazil.

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 may lead to persistent and potentially incapacitating clinical manifestations (post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC)). Using easy-to-apply questionnaires and scales (often by telephone interviewing), several studies evaluated samples of COVID-19 inpatients from 4 weeks to several months after discharge. However, studies conducting systematic multidisciplinary assessments of PASC manifestations are scarce, with thorough in-person objective evaluations restricted to modestly sized subsamples presenting greatest disease severity. METHODS AND ANALYSES: We will conduct a prospective observational study of surviving individuals (above 18 years of age) from a cohort of over 3000 subjects with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 who were treated as inpatients at the largest academic health centre in Sao Paulo, Brazil (Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo). All eligible subjects will be consecutively invited to undergo a 1-2-day series of multidisciplinary assessments at 2 time-points, respectively, at 6-9 months and 12-15 months after discharge. Assessment schedules will include detailed multidomain questionnaires applied by medical research staff, self-report scales, objective evaluations of cardiopulmonary functioning, physical functionality and olfactory status, standardised neurological, psychiatric and cognitive examinations, as well as diagnostic laboratory, muscle ultrasound and chest imaging exams. Remaining material from blood tests will be incorporated by a local biobank for use in future investigations on inflammatory markers, genomics, transcriptomics, peptidomics and metabolomics. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: All components of this programme have been approved by local research ethics committees. We aim to provide insights into the frequency and severity of chronic/post-COVID multiorgan symptoms, as well as their interrelationships and associations with acute disease features, sociodemographic variables and environmental exposures. Findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and at scientific meetings. Additionally, we aim to provide a data repository to allow future pathophysiological investigations relating clinical PASC features to biomarker data extracted from blood samples. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: RBR-8z7v5wc; Pre-results.

Differences in children and adolescents with SARS-CoV-2 infection: a cohort study in a Brazilian tertiary referral hospital.

OBJECTIVES: To compare demographic/clinical/laboratory/treatments and outcomes among children and adolescents with laboratory-confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study that included patients diagnosed with pediatric COVID-19 (aged <18 years) between April 11, 2020 and April 22, 2021. During this period, 102/5,951 (1.7%) of all admissions occurred in neonates, children, and adolescents. Furthermore, 3,962 severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection samples were processed in patients aged <18 years, and laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 occurred in 155 (4%) inpatients and outpatients. Six/155 pediatric patients were excluded from the study. Therefore, the final group included 149 children and adolescents (n=97 inpatients and 52 outpatients) with positive SARS-CoV-2 results. RESULTS: The frequencies of sore throat, anosmia, dysgeusia, headache, myalgia, nausea, lymphopenia, pre-existing chronic conditions, immunosuppressive conditions, and autoimmune diseases were significantly reduced in children and adolescents (p<0.05). Likewise, the frequencies of enoxaparin use (p=0.037), current immunosuppressant use (p=0.008), vasoactive agents (p=0.045), arterial hypotension (p<0.001), and shock (p=0.024) were significantly lower in children than in adolescents. Logistic regression analysis showed that adolescents with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 had increased odds ratios (ORs) for sore throat (OR 13.054; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.750-61.977; p=0.001), nausea (OR 8.875; 95% CI 1.660-47.446; p=0.011), and lymphopenia (OR 3.575; 95% CI 1.355-9.430; p=0.010), but also had less hospitalizations (OR 0.355; 95% CI 0.138-0.916; p=0.032). The additional logistic regression analysis on patients with preexisting chronic conditions (n=108) showed that death as an outcome was significantly associated with pediatric severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) (OR 22.300; 95% CI 2.341-212.421; p=0.007) and multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) (OR 11.261; 95% CI 1.189-106. 581; p=0.035). CONCLUSIONS: Half of the laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases occurred in adolescents. Individuals belonging to this age group had an acute systemic involvement of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Pediatric SARS and MIS-C were the most important factors associated with the mortality rate in pediatric chronic conditions with COVID-19.

Diaphragmatic ultrasound: a review of its methodological aspects and clinical uses.

The diaphragm is the main muscle of respiration, acting continuously and uninterruptedly to sustain the task of breathing. Diaphragmatic dysfunction can occur secondary to numerous pathological conditions and is usually underdiagnosed in clinical practice because of its nonspecific presentation. Although several techniques have been used in evaluating diaphragmatic function, the diagnosis of diaphragmatic dysfunction is still problematic. Diaphragmatic ultrasound has gained importance because of its many advantages, including the fact that it is noninvasive, does not expose patients to radiation, is widely available, provides immediate results, is highly accurate, and is repeatable at the bedside. Various authors have described ultrasound techniques to assess diaphragmatic excursion and diaphragm thickening in the zone of apposition. Recent studies have proposed standardization of the methods. This article reviews the usefulness of ultrasound for the evaluation of diaphragmatic function, addressing the details of the technique, the main findings, and the clinical applications.

Characteristics and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU in a university hospital in São Paulo, Brazil - study protocol.

OBJECTIVES: We designed a cohort study to describe characteristics and outcomes of patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) in the largest public hospital in Sao Paulo, Brazil, as Latin America becomes the epicenter of the pandemic. METHODS: This is the protocol for a study being conducted at an academic hospital in Brazil with 300 adult ICU beds dedicated to COVID-19 patients. We will include adult patients admitted to the ICU with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 during the study period. The main outcome is ICU survival at 28 days. Data will be collected prospectively and retrospectively by trained investigators from the hospital's electronic medical records, using an electronic data capture tool. We will collect data on demographics, comorbidities, severity of disease, and laboratorial test results at admission. Information on the need for advanced life support and ventilator parameters will be collected during ICU stay. Patients will be followed up for 28 days in the ICU and 60 days in the hospital. We will plot Kaplan-Meier curves to estimate ICU and hospital survival and perform survival analysis using the Cox proportional hazards model to identify the main risk factors for mortality. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04378582. RESULTS: We expect to include a large sample of patients with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU and to be able to provide data on admission characteristics, use of advanced life support, ICU survival at 28 days, and hospital survival at 60 days. CONCLUSIONS: This study will provide epidemiological data about critically ill patients with COVID-19 in Brazil, which could inform health policy and resource allocation in low- and middle-income countries.

A comprehensive physical functional assessment of survivors of critical care unit stay due to COVID-19 / Avaliação físico-funcional abrangente de sobreviventes de internação em unidade de terapia intensiva devido à COVID-19

ABSTRACT Objective: To examine the physical function and respiratory muscle strength of patients - who recovered from critical COVID-19 - after intensive care unit discharge to the ward on Days one (D1) and seven (D7), and to investigate variables associated with functional impairment. Methods: This was a prospective cohort study of adult patients with COVID-19 who needed invasive mechanical ventilation, non-invasive ventilation or high-flow nasal cannula and were discharged from the intensive care unit to the ward. Participants were submitted to Medical Research Council sum-score, handgrip strength, maximal inspiratory pressure, maximal expiratory pressure, and short physical performance battery tests. Participants were grouped into two groups according to their need for invasive ventilation: the Invasive Mechanical Ventilation Group (IMV Group) and the Non-Invasive Mechanical Ventilation Group (Non-IMV Group). Results: Patients in the IMV Group (n = 31) were younger and had higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores than those in the Non-IMV Group (n = 33). The short physical performance battery scores (range 0 - 12) on D1 and D7 were 6.1 ± 4.3 and 7.3 ± 3.8, respectively for the Non-Invasive Mechanical Ventilation Group, and 1.3 ± 2.5 and 2.6 ± 3.7, respectively for the IMV Group. The prevalence of intensive care unit-acquired weakness on D7 was 13% for the Non-IMV Group and 72% for the IMV Group. The maximal inspiratory pressure, maximal expiratory pressure, and handgrip strength increased on D7 in both groups, but the maximal expiratory pressure and handgrip strength were still weak. Only maximal inspiratory pressure was recovered (i.e., > 80% of the predicted value) in the Non-IMV Group. Female sex, and the need and duration of invasive mechanical were independently and negatively associated with the short physical performance battery score and handgrip strength. Conclusion: Patients who recovered from critical COVID-19 and who received invasive mechanical ventilation presented greater disability than those who were not invasively ventilated. However, they both showed marginal functional improvement during early recovery, regardless of the need for invasive mechanical ventilation. This might highlight the severity of disability caused by SARS-CoV-2.

RESUMO Objetivo: Examinar a função física e a força muscular respiratória de pacientes que se recuperaram da COVID-19 grave após a alta da unidade de terapia intensiva para a enfermaria nos Dias 1 e 7 e investigar as variáveis associadas ao comprometimento funcional. Métodos: Trata-se de estudo de coorte prospectivo de pacientes adultos com COVID-19 que necessitaram de ventilação mecânica invasiva, ventilação mecânica não invasiva ou cânula nasal de alto fluxo e tiveram alta da unidade de terapia intensiva para a enfermaria. Os participantes foram submetidos aos testes Medical Research Council sum-score, força de preensão manual, pressão inspiratória máxima, pressão expiratória máxima e short physical performance battery. Os participantes foram agrupados em dois grupos conforme a necessidade de ventilação mecânica invasiva: o Grupo Ventilação Mecânica Invasiva (Grupo VMI) e o Grupo Não Ventilação Mecânica Invasiva (Grupo Não VMI). Resultados: Os pacientes do Grupo VMI (n = 31) eram mais jovens e tinham pontuações do Sequential Organ Failure Assessment mais altas do que os do Grupo VMI (n = 33). As pontuações do short physical performance battery (intervalo de zero a 12) nos Dias 1 e 7 foram 6,1 ± 4,3 e 7,3 ± 3,8, respectivamente para o Grupo Não VMI, e 1,3 ± 2,5 e 2,6 ± 3,7, respectivamente para o Grupo VMI. A prevalência de fraqueza adquirida na unidade de terapia intensiva no Dia 7 foi de 13% para o Grupo Não VMI e de 72% para o Grupo VMI. A pressão inspiratória máxima, a pressão expiratória máxima e a força de preensão manual aumentaram no Dia 7 em ambos os grupos, porém a pressão expiratória máxima e a força de preensão manual ainda eram fracas. Apenas a pressão inspiratória máxima foi recuperada (ou seja, > 80% do valor previsto) no Grupo Não VMI. As variáveis sexo feminino, e necessidade e duração da ventilação mecânica invasiva foram associadas de forma independente e negativa à pontuação do short physical performance battery e à força de preensão manual. Conclusão: Os pacientes que se recuperaram da COVID-19 grave e receberam ventilação mecânica invasiva apresentaram maior incapacidade do que aqueles que não foram ventilados invasivamente. No entanto, os dois grupos de pacientes apresentaram melhora funcional marginal durante a fase inicial de recuperação, independentemente da necessidade de ventilação mecânica invasiva. Esse resultado pode evidenciar a gravidade da incapacidade causada pelo SARS-CoV-2.

Computed tomography in hypersensitivity pneumonitis: main findings, differential diagnosis and pitfalls.

INTRODUCTION: Hypersensitivity pneumonitis (HP) is a disease with variable clinical presentation in which inflammation in the lung parenchyma is caused by the inhalation of specific organic antigens or low molecular weight substances in genetically susceptible individuals. Alterations of the acute, subacute and chronic forms may eventually overlap, and the diagnosis based on temporality and presence of fibrosis (acute/inflammatory HP vs. chronic HP) seems to be more feasible and useful in clinical practice. Differential diagnosis of chronic HP with other interstitial fibrotic diseases is challenging due to the overlap of the clinical history, and the functional and imaging findings of these pathologies in the terminal stages. Areas covered: This article reviews the essential features of HP with emphasis on imaging features. Moreover, the main methodological limitations of high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) interpretation are discussed, as well as new perspectives with volumetric quantitative CT analysis as a useful tool for retrieving detailed and accurate information from the lung parenchyma. Expert commentary: Mosaic attenuation is a prominent feature of this disease, but air trapping in chronic HP seems overestimated. Quantitative analysis has the potential to estimate the involvement of the pulmonary parenchyma more accurately and could correlate better with pulmonary function results.

The II Brazilian Guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 Joint Guidelines of the Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência, Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, Associação Médica Brasileira, Sociedade Brasileira de Angiologia e Cirurgia Vascular, Sociedade Brasileira de Infectologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia and Sociedade Brasileira de Reumatologia / II Diretrizes Brasileiras para o tratamento farmacológico de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 Diretriz conjunta da Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência, Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, Associação Médica Brasileira, Sociedade Brasileira de Angiologia e Cirurgia Vascular, Sociedade Brasileira de Infectologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia e Sociedade Brasileira de Reumatologia

ABSTRACT Objective: To update the recommendations to support decisions regarding the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Brazil. Methods: Experts, including representatives of the Ministry of Health and methodologists, created this guideline. The method used for the rapid development of guidelines was based on the adoption and/or adaptation of existing international guidelines (GRADE ADOLOPMENT) and supported by the e-COVID-19 RecMap platform. The quality of the evidence and the preparation of the recommendations followed the GRADE method. Results: Twenty-one recommendations were generated, including strong recommendations for the use of corticosteroids in patients using supplemental oxygen and conditional recommendations for the use of tocilizumab and baricitinib for patients on supplemental oxygen or on noninvasive ventilation and anticoagulants to prevent thromboembolism. Due to suspension of use authorization, it was not possible to make recommendations regarding the use of casirivimab + imdevimab. Strong recommendations against the use of azithromycin in patients without suspected bacterial infection, hydroxychloroquine, convalescent plasma, colchicine, and lopinavir + ritonavir and conditional recommendations against the use of ivermectin and remdesivir were made. Conclusion: New recommendations for the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were generated, such as those for tocilizumab and baricitinib. Corticosteroids and prophylaxis for thromboembolism are still recommended, the latter with conditional recommendation. Several drugs were considered ineffective and should not be used to provide the best treatment according to the principles of evidence-based medicine and to promote resource economy.

RESUMO Objetivo: Atualizar as recomendações para embasar as decisões para o tratamento farmacológico de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 no Brasil. Métodos: A elaboração desta diretriz foi feita por especialistas, incluindo representantes do Ministério da Saúde e metodologistas. O método utilizado para o desenvolvimento rápido de diretrizes baseou-se na adoção e/ou adaptação de diretrizes internacionais existentes (GRADE ADOLOPMENT) e contou com o apoio da plataforma e-COVID-19 RecMap. A qualidade das evidências e a elaboração das recomendações seguiram o método GRADE. Resultados: Chegaram-se a 21 recomendações, incluindo recomendações fortes quanto ao uso de corticosteroides em pacientes em uso de oxigênio suplementar e recomendações condicionais para o uso de tocilizumabe e baricitinibe, em pacientes com oxigênio suplementar ou ventilação não invasiva, e de anticoagulantes, para prevenção de tromboembolismo. Devido à suspensão da autorização de uso, não foi possível fazer recomendações para o tratamento com casirivimabe + imdevimabe. Foram feitas recomendações fortes contra o uso de azitromicina em pacientes sem suspeita de infecção bacteriana, hidroxicloroquina, plasma convalescente, colchicina e lopinavir + ritonavir, além de recomendações condicionais contra o uso de ivermectina e rendesivir. Conclusão: Foram criadas novas recomendações para o tratamento de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19, como as recomendações de tocilizumabe e baricitinibe. Ainda são recomendados corticosteroides e profilaxia contra tromboembolismo, esta em caráter condicional. Vários medicamentos foram considerados ineficazes e não devem ser usados, no intuito de proporcionar o melhor tratamento segundo os princípios da medicina baseada em evidências e promover a economia de recursos.

Ambulation capacity, age, immunosuppression, and mechanical ventilation are risk factors of in-hospital death in severe COVID-19: a cohort study

Abstract Importance: Despite ambulation capacity being associated with a decreased level of physical activity and survival may be influenced by the functional capacity, studies have not addressed the association between ambulation capacity and death in patients hospitalized by COVID-19. Objective: To verify the functional, clinical, and sociodemographic risk factors associated with in-hospital death in individuals with severe COVID-19. Methods: It is a cohort retrospective study performed at a large tertiary hospital. Patients 18 years of age or more, of both sexes, hospitalized due to severe COVID-19 were included. Cases with dubious medical records and/or missing essential data were excluded. Patients were classified according to their ambulation capacity before the COVID-19 infection. Information regarding sociodemographic characteristics, in-hospital death, total hospital stays, Intensive Care Unit (ICU) stays, and the necessity of Mechanical Ventilation (MV) were collected from medical records and registered in a RedCap database. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to identify possible factors associated with the in-hospital death rate. Results: Data from 1110 participants were included in the statistical analysis. The median age of the patients was 57 (46‒66) years, 58.42% (n = 590) were male, and 61.73% (n = 602) were brown or black. The case fatality rate during hospitalization was 36.0% (n = 363). In-hospital death was associated with ambulation capacity; dependent ambulators (OR = 2.3; CI 95% = 1.2-4.4) and non-functional ambulation (OR = 1.9; CI 95% = 1.1-3.3), age [older adults (OR = 3.0; CI 95% = 1.9‒4.), ICU stays (OR = 1.4; CI 95% = 1.2‒1.4), immunosuppression (OR = 5.5 CI 95% = 2.3‒13.5) and mechanical ventilation (OR = 27.5; CI 95% = 12.0-62.9). Conclusion and relevance: Decreased ambulation capacity, age, length of ICU stay, immunosuppression, and mechanical ventilation was associated with a high risk of in-hospital death due to COVID-19.

Desfechos clínicos e características da mecânica pulmonar entre a síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo associada à COVID-19 e a não associada à COVID-19: uma análise de escore de propensão de dois importantes ensaios randomizados / Clinical outcomes and lung mechanics characteristics between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome: a propensity score analysis of two major randomized trials

RESUMO Objetivo: Comparar a mecânica pulmonar e os desfechos entre a síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo associada à COVID-19 e a síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo não associada à COVID-19. Métodos: Combinamos dados de dois ensaios randomizados sobre a síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo, um incluindo apenas pacientes com COVID-19 e o outro incluindo apenas pacientes sem COVID-19, para determinar se a síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo associada à COVID-19 está associada à maior mortalidade aos 28 dias do que a síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo não associada à COVID-19 e também examinar as diferenças na mecânica pulmonar entre esses dois tipos de síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo. Resultados: Foram incluídos na análise principal 299 pacientes com síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo associada à COVID-19 e 1.010 pacientes com síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo não associada à COVID-19. Os resultados mostraram que os pacientes sem COVID-19 utilizaram pressão positiva expiratória final mais alta (12,5cmH2O; DP 3,2 versus 11,7cmH2O; DP 2,8; p < 0,001), foram ventilados com volumes correntes mais baixos (5,8mL/kg; DP 1,0 versus 6,5mL/kg; DP 1,2; p < 0,001) e apresentaram menor complacência respiratória estática ajustada para o peso ideal (0,5mL/cmH2O/kg; DP 0,3 versus 0,6mL/cmH2O/kg; DP 0,3; p = 0,01). Não houve diferença entre os grupos quanto à mortalidade aos 28 dias (52,3% versus 58,9%; p = 0,52) ou à duração da ventilação mecânica nos primeiros 28 dias entre os sobreviventes (13 [IQ 5 - 22] dias versus 12 [IQ 6 - 26] dias; p = 0,46). Conclusão: Esta análise mostrou que os pacientes com síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo não associada à COVID-19 têm mecânica pulmonar diferente, mas desfechos semelhantes aos dos pacientes com síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo associada à COVID-19. Após pareamento por escore de propensão, não houve diferença na mecânica pulmonar e nem nos desfechos entre os grupos.

ABSTRACT Objective: To compare the lung mechanics and outcomes between COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome and non-COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome. Methods: We combined data from two randomized trials in acute respiratory distress syndrome, one including only COVID-19 patients and the other including only patients without COVID-19, to determine whether COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome is associated with higher 28-day mortality than non-COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome and to examine the differences in lung mechanics between these two types of acute respiratory distress syndrome. Results: A total of 299 patients with COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome and 1,010 patients with non-COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome were included in the main analysis. The results showed that non-COVID-19 patients used higher positive end-expiratory pressure (12.5cmH2O; SD 3.2 versus 11.7cmH2O SD 2.8; p < 0.001), were ventilated with lower tidal volumes (5.8mL/kg; SD 1.0 versus 6.5mL/kg; SD 1.2; p < 0.001) and had lower static respiratory compliance adjusted for ideal body weight (0.5mL/cmH2O/kg; SD 0.3 versus 0.6mL/cmH2O/kg; SD 0.3; p = 0.01). There was no difference between groups in 28-day mortality (52.3% versus 58.9%; p = 0.52) or mechanical ventilation duration in the first 28 days among survivors (13 [IQR 5 - 22] versus 12 [IQR 6 - 26], p = 0.46). Conclusion: This analysis showed that patients with non-COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome have different lung mechanics but similar outcomes to COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome patients. After propensity score matching, there was no difference in lung mechanics or outcomes between groups.

Diretrizes Brasileiras para o tratamento farmacológico de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19: Diretriz conjunta da Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência, Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, Associação Médica Brasileira, Sociedade Brasileira de Angiologia e Cirurgia Vascular, Sociedade Brasileira de Infectologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia e Sociedade Brasileira de Reumatologia / Brazilian Guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19: Joint guideline of Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência, Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, Associação Médica Brasileira, Sociedade Brasileira de Angiologia e Cirurgia Vascular, Sociedade Brasileira de Infectologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Reumatologia

Há diversas terapias sendo utilizadas ou propostas para a COVID-19, muitas carecendo de apropriada avaliação de efetividade e segurança. O propósito deste documento é elaborar recomendações para subsidiar decisões sobre o tratamento farmacológico de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 no Brasil. Métodos: Um grupo de 27 membros, formado por especialistas, representantes do Ministério da Saúde e metodologistas, integra essa diretriz. Foi utilizado o método de elaboração de diretrizes rápidas, tomando por base a adoção e/ou a adaptação de recomendações a partir de diretrizes internacionais existentes (GRADE ADOLOPMENT), apoiadas pela plataforma e-COVID-19 RecMap. A qualidade das evidências e a elaboração das recomendações seguiram o método GRADE. Resultados: Foram geradas 16 recomendações. Entre elas, estão recomendações fortes para o uso de corticosteroides em pacientes em uso de oxigênio suplementar, para o uso de anticoagulantes em doses de profilaxia para tromboembolismo e para não uso de antibacterianos nos pacientes sem suspeita de infecção bacteriana. Não foi possível fazer uma recomendação quanto à utilização do tocilizumabe em pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 em uso de oxigênio, pelas incertezas na disponibilidade e de acesso ao medicamento. Foi feita recomendação para não usar azitromicina, casirivimabe + imdevimabe, cloroquina, colchicina, hidroxicloroquina, ivermectina, lopinavir/ ritonavir, plasma convalescente e rendesivir. Conclusão: Até o momento, poucas terapias se provaram efetivas no tratamento do paciente hospitalizado com COVID-19, sendo recomendados apenas corticosteroides e profilaxia para tromboembolismo. Diversos medicamentos foram considerados ineficazes, devendo ser descartados, de forma a oferecer o melhor tratamento pelos princípios da medicina baseada em evidências e promover economia de recursos não eficazes.

Several therapies are being used or proposed for COVID-19, and many lack appropriate evaluations of their effectiveness and safety. The purpose of this document is to develop recommendations to support decisions regarding the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Brazil. Methods: A group of 27 experts, including representatives of the Ministry of Health and methodologists, created this guideline. The method used for the rapid development of guidelines was based on the adoption and/or adaptation of existing international guidelines (GRADE ADOLOPMENT) and supported by the e-COVID-19 RecMap platform. The quality of the evidence and the preparation of the recommendations followed the GRADE method. Results: Sixteen recommendations were generated. They include strong recommendations for the use of corticosteroids in patients using supplemental oxygen, the use of anticoagulants at prophylactic doses to prevent thromboembolism and the nonuse of antibiotics in patients without suspected bacterial infection. It was not possible to make a recommendation regarding the use of tocilizumab in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 using oxygen due to uncertainties regarding the availability of and access to the drug. Strong recommendations against the use of hydroxychloroquine, convalescent plasma, colchicine, lopinavir + ritonavir and antibiotics in patients without suspected bacterial infection and also conditional recommendations against the use of casirivimab + imdevimab, ivermectin and rendesivir were made. Conclusion: To date, few therapies have proven effective in the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19, and only corticosteroids and prophylaxis for thromboembolism are recommended. Several drugs were considered ineffective and should not be used to provide the best treatment according to the principles of evidence-based medicine and promote economical resource use.

Differences in children and adolescents with SARS-CoV-2 infection: a cohort study in a Brazilian tertiary referral hospital

OBJECTIVES: To compare demographic/clinical/laboratory/treatments and outcomes among children and adolescents with laboratory-confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study that included patients diagnosed with pediatric COVID-19 (aged <18 years) between April 11, 2020 and April 22, 2021. During this period, 102/5,951 (1.7%) of all admissions occurred in neonates, children, and adolescents. Furthermore, 3,962 severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection samples were processed in patients aged <18 years, and laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 occurred in 155 (4%) inpatients and outpatients. Six/155 pediatric patients were excluded from the study. Therefore, the final group included 149 children and adolescents (n=97 inpatients and 52 outpatients) with positive SARS-CoV-2 results. RESULTS: The frequencies of sore throat, anosmia, dysgeusia, headache, myalgia, nausea, lymphopenia, pre-existing chronic conditions, immunosuppressive conditions, and autoimmune diseases were significantly reduced in children and adolescents (p<0.05). Likewise, the frequencies of enoxaparin use (p=0.037), current immunosuppressant use (p=0.008), vasoactive agents (p=0.045), arterial hypotension (p<0.001), and shock (p=0.024) were significantly lower in children than in adolescents. Logistic regression analysis showed that adolescents with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 had increased odds ratios (ORs) for sore throat (OR 13.054; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.750-61.977; p=0.001), nausea (OR 8.875; 95% CI 1.660-47.446; p=0.011), and lymphopenia (OR 3.575; 95% CI 1.355-9.430; p=0.010), but also had less hospitalizations (OR 0.355; 95% CI 0.138-0.916; p=0.032). The additional logistic regression analysis on patients with preexisting chronic conditions (n=108) showed that death as an outcome was significantly associated with pediatric severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) (OR 22.300; 95% CI 2.341-212.421; p=0.007) and multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) (OR 11.261; 95% CI 1.189-106. 581; p=0.035). CONCLUSIONS: Half of the laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases occurred in adolescents. Individuals belonging to this age group had an acute systemic involvement of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Pediatric SARS and MIS-C were the most important factors associated with the mortality rate in pediatric chronic conditions with COVID-19.

Characteristics and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU in a university hospital in São Paulo, Brazil - study protocol

OBJECTIVES: We designed a cohort study to describe characteristics and outcomes of patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) in the largest public hospital in Sao Paulo, Brazil, as Latin America becomes the epicenter of the pandemic. METHODS: This is the protocol for a study being conducted at an academic hospital in Brazil with 300 adult ICU beds dedicated to COVID-19 patients. We will include adult patients admitted to the ICU with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 during the study period. The main outcome is ICU survival at 28 days. Data will be collected prospectively and retrospectively by trained investigators from the hospital's electronic medical records, using an electronic data capture tool. We will collect data on demographics, comorbidities, severity of disease, and laboratorial test results at admission. Information on the need for advanced life support and ventilator parameters will be collected during ICU stay. Patients will be followed up for 28 days in the ICU and 60 days in the hospital. We will plot Kaplan-Meier curves to estimate ICU and hospital survival and perform survival analysis using the Cox proportional hazards model to identify the main risk factors for mortality. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04378582. RESULTS: We expect to include a large sample of patients with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU and to be able to provide data on admission characteristics, use of advanced life support, ICU survival at 28 days, and hospital survival at 60 days. CONCLUSIONS: This study will provide epidemiological data about critically ill patients with COVID-19 in Brazil, which could inform health policy and resource allocation in low- and middle-income countries.

Brazilian recommendations of mechanical ventilation 2013. Part I.

Perspectives on invasive and noninvasive ventilatory support for critically ill patients are evolving, as much evidence indicates that ventilation may have positive effects on patient survival and the quality of the care provided in intensive care units in Brazil. For those reasons, the Brazilian Association of Intensive Care Medicine (Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira - AMIB) and the Brazilian Thoracic Society (Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumonia e Tisiologia - SBPT), represented by the Mechanical Ventilation Committee and the Commission of Intensive Therapy, respectively, decided to review the literature and draft recommendations for mechanical ventilation with the goal of creating a document for bedside guidance as to the best practices on mechanical ventilation available to their members. The document was based on the available evidence regarding 29 subtopics selected as the most relevant for the subject of interest. The project was developed in several stages, during which the selected topics were distributed among experts recommended by both societies with recent publications on the subject of interest and/or significant teaching and research activity in the field of mechanical ventilation in Brazil. The experts were divided into pairs that were charged with performing a thorough review of the international literature on each topic. All the experts met at the Forum on Mechanical Ventilation, which was held at the headquarters of AMIB in São Paulo on August 3 and 4, 2013, to collaboratively draft the final text corresponding to each sub-topic, which was presented to, appraised, discussed and approved in a plenary session that included all 58 participants and aimed to create the final document.

Occurrence of asthma symptoms and of airflow obstruction in amateur swimmers between 8 and 17 years of age.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of asthma symptoms and of airflow obstruction in amateur swimmers between 8 and 17 years of age, as well as to assess the awareness of asthma and asthma management among these swimmers, their parents, and their coaches. METHODS: Our sample comprised 1,116 amateur swimmers who completed a modified version of the International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Childhood written questionnaire, to which questions regarding the reasons to initiate swimming and regarding asthma management had been added. In addition, the participants underwent spirometry prior to a swimming competition. RESULTS: The prevalence of asthma symptoms in the last 12 months was 11.5%, and 327 (29.4%) of the participants reported "wheezing or whistling" in the past. Of the 223 swimmers who reported "asthma ever" or "bronchitis ever", only 102 (45.7%) reported having ever been treated: the most common "treatment" was swimming (in 37.3%), and only 12.7% used inhaled corticosteroids. Of the 254 participants (22.7%) with airflow obstruction, only 52 (20.5%) reported having asthma symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Asthma symptoms are present in amateur swimmers, and a considerable number of such swimmers have airflow obstruction without symptoms. It is therefore likely that the prevalence of asthma is underestimated in this population. It is worrisome that, in our study sample, the swimmers previously diagnosed with asthma were not using the recommended treatments for asthma. The clinical implications of these findings underscore the importance of implementing educational measures for amateur swimmers, as well as for their parents and coaches, to help them recognize asthma symptoms and the consequent risks in the sports environment, in order to allow prompt diagnosis and early clinical intervention.