Nosocomial COVID-19: A Nationwide Spanish Study.

INTRODUCTION: SARS-CoV-2 is a highly contagious virus, and despite professionals' best efforts, nosocomial COVID-19 (NC) infections have been reported. This work aimed to describe differences in symptoms and outcomes between patients with NC and community-acquired COVID-19 (CAC) and to identify risk factors for severe outcomes among NC patients. METHODS: This is a nationwide, retrospective, multicenter, observational study that analyzed patients hospitalized with confirmed COVID-19 in 150 Spanish hospitals (SEMI-COVID-19 Registry) from March 1, 2020, to April 30, 2021. NC was defined as patients admitted for non-COVID-19 diseases with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test on the fifth day of hospitalization or later. The primary outcome was 30-day in-hospital mortality (IHM). The secondary outcome was other COVID-19-related complications. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed. RESULTS: Of the 23,219 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, 1,104 (4.8%) were NC. Compared to CAC patients, NC patients were older (median 76 vs. 69 years; p < 0.001), had more comorbidities (median Charlson Comorbidity Index 5 vs. 3; p < 0.001), were less symptomatic (p < 0.001), and had normal chest X-rays more frequently (30.8% vs. 12.5%, p < 0.001). After adjusting for sex, age, dependence, COVID-19 wave, and comorbidities, NC was associated with lower risk of moderate/severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.59-0.87; p < 0.001) and higher risk of acute heart failure (aOR: 1.40; 1.12-1.72; p = 0.003), sepsis (aOR: 1.73; 1.33-2.54; p < 0.001), and readmission (aOR: 1.35; 1.03-1.83; p = 0.028). NC was associated with a higher case fatality rate (39.1% vs. 19.2%) in all age groups. IHM was significantly higher among NC patients (aOR: 2.07; 1.81-2.68; p < 0.001). Risk factors for increased IHM in NC patients were age, moderate/severe dependence, malignancy, dyspnea, moderate/severe ARDS, multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, and shock; odynophagia was associated with lower IHM. CONCLUSIONS: NC is associated with greater mortality and complications compared to CAC. Hospital strategies to prevent NC must be strengthened.

Clinical Features and Risk Factors for Mortality Among Long-term Care Facility Residents Hospitalized Due to COVID-19 in Spain.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 severely impacted older adults and long-term care facility (LTCF) residents. Our primary aim was to describe differences in clinical and epidemiological variables, in-hospital management, and outcomes between LTCF residents and community-dwelling older adults hospitalized with COVID-19. The secondary aim was to identify risk factors for mortality due to COVID-19 in hospitalized LTCF residents. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional analysis within a retrospective cohort of hospitalized patients ≥75 years with confirmed COVID-19 admitted to 160 Spanish hospitals. Differences between groups and factors associated with mortality among LTCF residents were assessed through comparisons and logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Of 6 189 patients ≥75 years, 1 185 (19.1%) were LTCF residents and 4 548 (73.5%) were community-dwelling. LTCF residents were older (median: 87.4 vs 82.1 years), mostly female (61.6% vs 43.2%), had more severe functional dependence (47.0% vs 7.8%), more comorbidities (Charlson Comorbidity Index: 6 vs 5), had dementia more often (59.1% vs 14.4%), and had shorter duration of symptoms (median: 3 vs 6 days) than community-dwelling patients (all, p < .001). Mortality risk factors in LTCF residents were severe functional dependence (adjusted odds ratios [aOR]: 1.79; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.13-2.83; p = .012), dyspnea (1.66; 1.16-2.39; p = .004), SatO2 < 94% (1.73; 1.27-2.37; p = .001), temperature ≥ 37.8°C (1.62; 1.11-2.38; p = .013); qSOFA index ≥ 2 (1.62; 1.11-2.38; p = .013), bilateral infiltrates (1.98; 1.24-2.98; p < .001), and high C-reactive protein (1.005; 1.003-1.007; p < .001). In-hospital mortality was initially higher among LTCF residents (43.3% vs 39.7%), but lower after adjusting for sex, age, functional dependence, and comorbidities (aOR: 0.74, 95%CI: 0.62-0.87; p < .001). CONCLUSION: Basal functional status and COVID-19 severity are risk factors of mortality in LTCF residents. The lower adjusted mortality rate in LTCF residents may be explained by earlier identification, treatment, and hospitalization for COVID-19.

Real-Life Impact of Glucocorticoid Treatment in COVID-19 Mortality: A Multicenter Retrospective Study.

We aimed to determine the impact of steroid use in COVID-19 in-hospital mortality, in a retrospective cohort study of the SEMICOVID19 database of admitted patients with SARS-CoV-2 laboratory-confirmed pneumonia from 131 Spanish hospitals. Patients treated with corticosteroids were compared to patients not treated with corticosteroids; and adjusted using a propensity-score for steroid treatment. From March-July 2020, 5.262 (35.26%) were treated with corticosteroids and 9.659 (64.73%) were not. In-hospital mortality overall was 20.50%; it was higher in patients treated with corticosteroids than in controls (28.5% versus 16.2%, OR 2.068 [95% confidence interval; 1.908 to 2.242]; p = 0.0001); however, when adjusting by occurrence of ARDS, mortality was significantly lower in the steroid group (43.4% versus 57.6%; OR 0.564 [95% confidence interval; 0.503 to 0.633]; p = 0.0001). Moreover, the greater the respiratory failure, the greater the impact on mortality of the steroid treatment. When adjusting these results including the propensity score as a covariate, in-hospital mortality remained significantly lower in the steroid group (OR 0.774 [0.660 to 0.907], p = 0.002). Steroid treatment reduced mortality by 24% relative to no steroid treatment (RRR 0.24). These results support the use of glucocorticoids in COVID-19 in this subgroup of patients.

Risk Categories in COVID-19 Based on Degrees of Inflammation: Data on More Than 17,000 Patients from the Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 Registry.

(1) Background: The inflammation or cytokine storm that accompanies COVID-19 marks the prognosis. This study aimed to identify three risk categories based on inflammatory parameters on admission. (2) Methods: Retrospective cohort study of patients diagnosed with COVID-19, collected and followed-up from 1 March to 31 July 2020, from the nationwide Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 Registry. The three categories of low, intermediate, and high risk were determined by taking into consideration the terciles of the total lymphocyte count and the values of C-reactive protein, lactate dehydrogenase, ferritin, and D-dimer taken at the time of admission. (3) Results: A total of 17,122 patients were included in the study. The high-risk group was older (57.9 vs. 64.2 vs. 70.4 years; p < 0.001) and predominantly male (37.5% vs. 46.9% vs. 60.1%; p < 0.001). They had a higher degree of dependence in daily tasks prior to admission (moderate-severe dependency in 10.8% vs. 14.1% vs. 17%; p < 0.001), arterial hypertension (36.9% vs. 45.2% vs. 52.8%; p < 0.001), dyslipidemia (28.4% vs. 37% vs. 40.6%; p < 0.001), diabetes mellitus (11.9% vs. 17.1% vs. 20.5%; p < 0.001), ischemic heart disease (3.7% vs. 6.5% vs. 8.4%; p < 0.001), heart failure (3.4% vs. 5.2% vs. 7.6%; p < 0.001), liver disease (1.1% vs. 3% vs. 3.9%; p = 0.002), chronic renal failure (2.3% vs. 3.6% vs. 6.7%; p < 0.001), cancer (6.5% vs. 7.2% vs. 11.1%; p < 0.001), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (5.7% vs. 5.4% vs. 7.1%; p < 0.001). They presented more frequently with fever, dyspnea, and vomiting. These patients more frequently required high flow nasal cannula (3.1% vs. 4.4% vs. 9.7%; p < 0.001), non-invasive mechanical ventilation (0.9% vs. 3% vs. 6.3%; p < 0.001), invasive mechanical ventilation (0.6% vs. 2.7% vs. 8.7%; p < 0.001), and ICU admission (0.9% vs. 3.6% vs. 10.6%; p < 0.001), and had a higher percentage of in-hospital mortality (2.3% vs. 6.2% vs. 23.9%; p < 0.001). The three risk categories proved to be an independent risk factor in multivariate analyses. (4) Conclusion: The present study identifies three risk categories for the requirement of high flow nasal cannula, mechanical ventilation, ICU admission, and in-hospital mortality based on lymphopenia and inflammatory parameters.

Cardiometabolic Therapy and Mortality in Very Old Patients With Diabetes Hospitalized due to COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The effects of cardiometabolic drugs on the prognosis of diabetic patients with COVID-19, especially very old patients, are not well known. This work was aimed to analyze the association between preadmission cardiometabolic therapy (antidiabetic, antiaggregant, antihypertensive, and lipid-lowering drugs) and in-hospital mortality among patients ≥80 years with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) hospitalized for COVID-19. METHOD: We conducted a nationwide, multicenter, observational study in patients ≥80 years with T2DM hospitalized for COVID-19 between March 1 and May 29, 2020. The primary outcome measure was in-hospital mortality. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the association between preadmission cardiometabolic therapy and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Of the 2 763 patients ≥80 years old hospitalized due to COVID-19, 790 (28.6%) had T2DM. Of these patients, 385 (48.7%) died during admission. On the multivariate analysis, the use of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.502, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.309-0.815, p = .005) and angiotensin receptor blockers (AOR 0.454, 95% CI: 0.274-0.759, p = .003) were independent protectors against in-hospital mortality, whereas the use of acetylsalicylic acid was associated with higher in-hospital mortality (AOR 1.761, 95% CI: 1.092-2.842, p = .020). Other antidiabetic drugs, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and statins showed neutral association with in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: We found important differences between cardiometabolic drugs and in-hospital mortality in older patients with T2DM hospitalized for COVID-19. Preadmission treatment with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers could reduce in-hospital mortality; other antidiabetic drugs, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and statins seem to have a neutral effect; and acetylsalicylic acid could be associated with excess mortality.

Gender-Based Differences by Age Range in Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19: A Spanish Observational Cohort Study.

There is some evidence that male gender could have a negative impact on the prognosis and severity of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. The aim of the present study was to compare the characteristics of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) between hospitalized men and women with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. This multicenter, retrospective, observational study is based on the SEMI-COVID-19 Registry. We analyzed the differences between men and women for a wide variety of demographic, clinical, and treatment variables, and the sex distribution of the reported COVID-19 deaths, as well as intensive care unit (ICU) admission by age subgroups. This work analyzed 12,063 patients (56.8% men). The women in our study were older than the men, on average (67.9 vs. 65.7 years; p < 001). Bilateral condensation was more frequent among men than women (31.8% vs. 29.9%; p = 0.007). The men needed non-invasive and invasive mechanical ventilation more frequently (5.6% vs. 3.6%, p < 0.001, and 7.9% vs. 4.8%, p < 0.001, respectively). The most prevalent complication was acute respiratory distress syndrome, with severe cases in 19.9% of men (p < 0.001). In men, intensive care unit admission was more frequent (10% vs. 6.1%; p < 0.001) and the mortality rate was higher (23.1% vs. 18.9%; p < 0.001). Regarding mortality, the differences by gender were statistically significant in the age groups from 55 years to 89 years of age. A multivariate analysis showed that female sex was significantly and independently associated with a lower risk of mortality in our study. Male sex appears to be related to worse progress in COVID-19 patients and is an independent prognostic factor for mortality. In order to fully understand its prognostic impact, other factors associated with sex must be considered.

What is new in listeriosis?

Listeriosis is a disease caused by Listeria monocytogenes (L. monocytogenes). L. monocytogenes is bacteria that usually infects some determined inhabitants, especially high risk patients such as the elderly, immunosuppressed patients and pregnant women. However, it can also affect people who do not have these risk factors. L. monocytogenes is widespread in nature being part of the faecal flora of many mammals and it is a common foodborne source. It is acquired by humans primarily through consumption of contaminated food. Besides, between 1% and 10% of the population is a faecal carrier of L.monocytogenes. Listeriosis may occur sporadically or in outbreaks. Infection causes a spectrum of illness, ranging from febrile gastroenteritis to invasive disease, including bacteraemia, sepsis, and meningoencephalitis. This infection has a low incidence, although it is undeniably increasing, particularly due to the rise of population of over 60 years old or of under 60 years olds with a predisposing condition. The diagnosis is complicated because of its incubation period and the different clinical manifestations. Also listeriosis has a high mortality despite adequate and early treatment. The importance of bacteraemia for L. monocytogenes lies in the infrequency of this bacterium and the high mortality, even with appropriate antibiotic treatment.