Usefulness of CURB-65, pneumonia severity index and MuLBSTA in predicting COVID-19 mortality.

The aim of our study is to evaluate the accuracy of CURB-65 and Pneumonia Severity Index (PSI), the most widely used scores for community acquired pneumonia, and MuLBSTA, a viral pneumonia score, in predicting 28-day mortality in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia.We retrospectively collected clinical data of consecutive patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia admitted at Papa Giovanni XXIII Hospital from February 23rd to March 14th, 2020. We calculated at Emergency Department (ED) presentation CURB-65, PSI and MuLBSTA and we compared their performances in discriminating between survivors and non-survivors at 28 days. Among 431 hospitalized patients, the majority presented with hypoxic respiratory failure: median (interquartile range, IQR) PaO2/FiO2 ratio at admission was 228.6 (142.0-278.1). In the first 24 hours, 111 (27%) patients were administered low-flow oxygen cannula, 50 (12%) Venturi Mask, 95 (23%) non-rebreather mask, 106 (26%) non-invasive ventilation, 12 (3%) mechanical ventilation and 41 (9%) were not administered oxygen therapy. Mortality rate at 28-day was 35% (150/431). Between survivors and non-survivors, median (IQR) scores were, respectively, 1.0 (1.0-2.0) and 2.0 (2.0-3.0) for CURB-65 (p<0.001); 90.5 (76.0-105.5) and 115.0 (100.0-129.0) for PSI (p<0.001); 7.0 (5.0-10.0) and 11.0 (9.0-13.0) for MuLBSTA (p<0.001). Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCs) for each score were, respectively, 0.725 (0.662-0.787), 0.776 (0.693-0.859) and 0.743 (0.680-0.806) (p>0,05). PSI and MuLBSTA did not show a better performance when compared to CURB-65. Although CURB-65, PSI and MuLBSTA scores are useful tools to discriminate between survivors and non-survivors in COVID-19 pneumonia, their diagnostic accuracy in discriminating 28-day mortality in COVID-19 pneumonia is moderate, as confirmed by AUCs <0.80, and there is a potential underestimation of disease severity in the low-risk classes. For this reason, they should not be recommended in ED to decide between inpatient and outpatient management in patients affected by COVID-19 pneumonia.

Covid-19 and gender: lower rate but same mortality of severe disease in women-an observational study.

BACKGROUND: Gender-related factors might affect vulnerability to Covid-19. The aim of this study was to describe the role of gender on clinical features and 28-day mortality in Covid-19 patients. METHODS: Observational study of Covid-19 patients hospitalized in Bergamo, Italy, during the first three weeks of the outbreak. Medical records, clinical, radiological and laboratory findings upon admission and treatment have been collected. Primary outcome was 28-day mortality since hospitalization. RESULTS: 431 consecutive adult patients were admitted. Female patients were 119 (27.6%) with a mean age of 67.0 ± 14.5 years (vs 67.8 ± 12.5 for males, p = 0.54). Previous history of myocardial infarction, vasculopathy and former smoking habits were more common for males. At the time of admission PaO2/FiO2 was similar between men and women (228 [IQR, 134-273] vs 238 mmHg [150-281], p = 0.28). Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) assistance was needed in the first 24 h more frequently in male patients (25.7% vs 13.0%; p = 0.006). Overall 28-day mortality was 26.1% in women and 38.1% in men (p = 0.018). Gender did not result an independent predictor of death once the parameters related to disease severity at presentation were included in the multivariable analysis (p = 0.898). Accordingly, the Kaplan-Meier survival analysis in female and male patients requiring CPAP or non-invasive ventilation in the first 24 h did not find a significant difference (p = 0.687). CONCLUSION: Hospitalized women are less likely to die from Covid-19; however, once severe disease occurs, the risk of dying is similar to men. Further studies are needed to better investigate the role of gender in clinical course and outcome of Covid-19.

One-year mortality in COVID-19 is associated with patients' comorbidities rather than pneumonia severity.

BACKGROUND: In patients with pneumonia or acute respiratory distress syndrome who survived hospitalization, one-year mortality can affect up to one third of discharged patients. Therefore, significant long-term mortality after COVID-19 respiratory failure could be expected. The primary outcome of the present study was one-year all-cause mortality in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Observational study of COVID-19 patients hospitalized at Papa Giovanni XXIII Hospital (Bergamo, Italy), during the first pandemic wave. RESULTS: A total of 1326 COVID-19 patients were hospitalized. Overall one-year mortality was 33.6% (N 446/1326), with the majority of deaths occurring during hospitalization (N=412, 92.4%). Thirty-four patients amongst the 914 discharged (3.7%) subsequentely died within one year. A third of these patients died for advanced cancer, while death without a cause other than COVID-19 was uncommon (8.8% of the overall post-discharge mortality). In-hospital late mortality (i.e. after 28 days of admission) interested a population with a lower age, and fewer comorbidities, more frequentely admitted in ICU. Independent predictors of post-discharge mortality were age over 65 years (HR 3.19; 95% CI 1.28-7.96, p-value=0.013), presence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (HR 2.52; 95% CI 1.09-5.83, p-value=0.031) or proxy of cardiovascular disease (HR 4.93; 95% CI 1.45-16.75, p-value=0.010), and presence of active cancer (HR 3.64; 95% CI 1.50-8.84, p-value=0.004), but not pneumonia severity. CONCLUSIONS: One-year post-discharge mortality depends on underlying patients' comorbidities rather than COVID-19 pneumonia severity per se. Awareness among physicians of predictors of post-discharge mortality might be helpful in structuring a follow-up program for discharged patients.

Frequency, characteristics, and outcome of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and "silent hypoxemia" at admission: a severity-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: An aspect of COVID-19 baffling physicians is the presentation of patients with acute respiratory failure, but normal mental faculties and no perception of dyspnea (i.e. "silent hypoxemia"). The aim of this study was to investigate the frequency, characteristics, and outcome of COVID-19 patients with silent hypoxemic status and comparing them with a symptomatic severity-matched group. METHODS: This is a retrospective monocentric observational study involving all patients with PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia, admitted at Papa Giovanni XXIII Hospital, Bergamo (Italy) from Emergency Department due to acute respiratory failure, during the first Italian pandemic peak (February-April 2020). RESULTS: Overall 28-day mortality in 1316 patients was 26.9%. Patients who did not report dyspnea at admission (N 469, 35.6%) had a lower 28-day mortality (22.6 vs. 29.3%, P=0.009). The severity matching analysis (i.e. PaO2/FiO2 and imaging) led to the identification of two groups of 254 patients that did not differ for sex prevalence, age, BMI, smoking history, comorbidities, and PaCO2 at admission. The use of CPAP during the first 24 hours, such as the need of endotracheal intubation (ETI) during the overall admission were significantly lower in matched patients with silent hypoxemia, whereas 28-day mortality resulted similar (P=0.21). CONCLUSIONS: Lack of dyspnea is common in patients suffering from severe COVID-19 pneumonia leading to respiratory failure, since up to a third of them could be asymptomatic on admission. Dyspnea per se correlates with pneumonia severity, and prognosis. However, dyspnea loses its predictive relevance once other findings to evaluate pneumonia severity are available such as PaO2/FiO2 and imaging. Silent hypoxemic patients are less likely to receive CPAP during the first 24 hours and ETI during the hospitalization, in spite of a comparable mortality to the dyspneic ones.

Worsening of gas exchange parameters at high FiO2 in COVID-19: misleading or informative?

BACKGROUND: In COVID-19, higher than expected level of intrapulmonary shunt has been described, in association with a discrepancy between the initial relatively preserved lung mechanics and the hypoxia severity. This study aim was to measure the shunt fraction and variations of PaO2/FiO2 ratio and oxygen alveolar-arterial gradient (A-a O2) at different FiO2. METHODS: Shunt was measured by a non-invasive system during spontaneous breathing in 12 patients hospitalized at COVID-19 Semi-Intensive Care Unit of Papa Giovanni XXIII Hospital, Bergamo, Italy, between October 22 and November 23, 2020. RESULTS: Nine patients were men, mean age (±SD) 62±15 years, mean BMI 27.5±4.8 Kg/m2. Systemic hypertension, diabetes type 2 and previous myocardial infarction were referred in 33%, 17%, and 7%, respectively. Mean PaO2/FiO2 ratio was 234±66 and 11 patients presented a bilateral chest X-ray involvement. Mean shunt was 21±6%. Mainly in patients with a more severe respiratory failure, we found a progressive decrease of PaO2/FiO2 ratio with higher FiO2. Considering (A-a O2), we found a uniform tendency to increase with FiO2 increasing. Even in this case, the more severe were the patients, the higher was the slope, suggesting FiO2 insensitiveness due to a shunt effect, as strengthened by our measurements. CONCLUSION: Relying on a single evaluation of PaO2/FiO2 ratio, especially at high FiO2, could be misleading in COVID-19. We propose a two steps evaluation, the first at low SpO2 value (e.g., 92-94%) and the second one at high FiO2 (i.e., >0.7), allowing to characterize both the amendable (ventilation/perfusion mismatch), and the fixed (shunt) contribution quote of respiratory impairment, respectively.