Real-World Effectiveness of Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir on Coronavirus Disease 2019-Associated Hospitalization Prevention: A Population-based Cohort Study in the Province of Quebec, Canada.

BACKGROUND: Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir has shown to reduce COVID-19 hospitalization and death before Omicron, but updated real-world evidence studies are needed. This study aimed to assess whether nirmatrelvir/ritonavir reduces the risk of COVID-19-associated hospitalization among high-risk outpatients. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of outpatients with SARS-CoV-2 between March 15 and 15 October 2022, using data from the Quebec clinico-administrative databases. Outpatients treated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir were compared with infected ones not receiving nirmatrelvir/ritonavir using propensity-score matching. Relative risk (RR) of COVID-19-associated hospitalization within 30 days was assessed using a Poisson regression. RESULTS: A total of 8402 treated outpatients were matched to controls. Regardless of vaccination status, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir treatment was associated with a 69% reduced RR of hospitalization (RR: .31; 95% CI: .28; .36; number needed to treat [NNT] = 13). The effect was more pronounced in outpatients with incomplete primary vaccination (RR: .04; 95% CI: .03; .06; NNT = 8), while no benefit was found in those with a complete primary vaccination (RR: .93; 95% CI: .78; 1.08). Subgroups analysis among high-risk outpatients with a complete primary vaccination showed that nirmatrelvir/ritonavir treatment was associated with a significant decrease in the RR of hospitalization in severely immunocompromised outpatients (RR: .66; 95% CI: .50; .89; NNT = 16) and in high-risk outpatients aged ≥70 years (RR: .50; 95% CI: .34; .74; NNT = 10) when the last dose of the vaccine was received at least 6 months ago. CONCLUSIONS: Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir reduces the risk of COVID-19-associated hospitalization among incompletely vaccinated high-risk outpatients and among some subgroups of completely vaccinated high-risk outpatients.

Outcomes of hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 infection in the Canadian first wave epicentre: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, a substantial number of Quebec hospitals were hit by hospital-acquired (HA) SARS-CoV-2 infections. Our objective was to assess whether mortality is higher in HA cases than in non-hospital-acquired (NHA) cases and determine the prevalence of HA-SARS-CoV-2 infection in our hospital. METHODS: This retrospective single-centre cohort study included all adults (≥ 18 yr) who had COVID-19, admitted to Hôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont (Montréal, Canada) from Mar. 1 to June 30, 2020. We collected data on demographic characteristics, comorbidities, treatment, admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) and mechanical ventilation requirements from electronic health records. We adjudicated hospital acquisition based on the timing of symptom onset, and polymerase chain reaction testing for and exposures to SARS-CoV-2. To evaluate the association between HA-SARS-CoV-2 infection and in-hospital mortality, we computed a multivariable logistic regression analysis including known risk factors for death in patients with COVID-19 as covariates. RESULTS: Among 697 patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, 253 (36.3%) were classified as HA. The mortality rate was higher in the HA group than in the NHA group (38.2% v. 26.4%, p = 0.001), while the rates of ICU admission (8.3% v. 19.1%, p = 0.001) and requirement for mechanical ventilation (3.6% v. 13.0%, p = 0.001) were lower. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that HA-SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients younger than 75 years is an independent risk factor for death (odds ratio 2.78, 95% confidence interval 1.44-5.38). INTERPRETATION: Our results show that HA-SARS-CoV-2 infection in younger patients was associated with higher mortality. Future studies need to evaluate relevant patient-centred long-term outcomes in this population.

Impact of pulmonary emphysema on exercise capacity and its physiological determinants in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Exercise limitation is common in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We determined the impact of pulmonary emphysema on the physiological response to exercise independent of contemporary measures of COPD severity. Smokers 40-79 years old with COPD underwent computed tomography, pulmonary function tesing, and symptom-limited incremental exercise testing. COPD severity was quantified according to the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) by spirometry (GOLD 1-4); and symptom burden and exacerbation risk (GOLD A-D). Emphysema severity was quantified as the percent lung volume <-950 Hounsfield units. Regression models adjusted for age, gender, body size, smoking status, airflow limitation, symptom burden and exacerbation risk. Among 67 COPD subjects (age 67 ± 8 years; 75% male; GOLD 1-4: 11%, 43%, 30%, 16%), median percent emphysema was 11%, and peak power output (PPO) was 61 ± 32 W. Higher percent emphysema independently predicted lower PPO (-24 W per 10% increment in emphysema; 95%CI -41 to -7 W). Throughout exercise, higher percent emphysema predicted 1) higher minute ventilation, ventilatory equivalent for CO2, and heart rate; and 2) lower oxy-hemoglobin saturation, and end-tidal PCO2. Independent of contemporary measures of COPD severity, the extent of pulmonary emphysema predicts lower exercise capacity, ventilatory inefficiency, impaired gas-exchange and increased heart rate response to exercise.

Comparison of inhaled milrinone, nitric oxide and prostacyclin in acute respiratory distress syndrome.

AIM: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of inhaled milrinone in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). METHODS: Open-label prospective cross-over pilot study where fifteen adult patients with hypoxemic failure meeting standard ARDS criteria and monitored with a pulmonary artery catheter were recruited in an academic 24-bed medico-surgical intensive care unit. Random sequential administration of iNO (20 ppm) or nebulized epoprostenol (10 µg/mL) was done in all patients. Thereafter, inhaled milrinone (1 mg/mL) alone followed by inhaled milrinone in association with inhaled nitric oxide (iNO) was administered. A jet nebulization device synchronized with the mechanical ventilation was use to administrate the epoprostenol and the milrinone. Hemodynamic measurements and partial pressure of arterial oxygen (PaO2) were recorded before and after each inhaled therapy administration. RESULTS: The majority of ARDS were of pulmonary cause (n = 13) and pneumonia (n = 7) was the leading underlying initial disease. Other pulmonary causes of ARDS were: Post cardiopulmonary bypass (n = 2), smoke inhalation injury (n = 1), thoracic trauma and pulmonary contusions (n = 2) and aspiration (n = 1). Two patients had an extra pulmonary cause of ARDS: A polytrauma patient and an intra-abdominal abscess Inhaled nitric oxide, epoprostenol, inhaled milrinone and the combination of inhaled milrinone and iNO had no impact on systemic hemodynamics. No significant adverse events related to study medications were observed. The median increase of PaO2 from baseline was 8.8 mmHg [interquartile range (IQR) = 16.3], 6.0 mmHg (IQR = 18.4), 6 mmHg (IQR = 15.8) and 9.2 mmHg (IQR = 20.2) respectively with iNO, epoprostenol, inhaled milrinone, and iNO added to milrinone. Only iNO and the combination of inhaled milrinone and iNO had a statistically significant effect on PaO2. CONCLUSION: When comparing the effects of inhaled NO, milrinone and epoprostenol, only NO significantly improved oxygenation. Inhaled milrinone appeared safe but failed to improve oxygenation in ARDS.