Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Шоу: 20 | 50 | 100
Результаты 1 - 20 de 24
Фильтр
Добавить фильтры

база данных
Годовой диапазон
1.
Sci Rep ; 13(1): 9035, 2023 06 03.
Статья в английский | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20244246

Реферат

In respiratory infections, anemia is both a consequence of acute inflammation and a predictor of poor clinical outcomes. There are few studies investigating the role of anemia in COVID-19, suggesting a potential role in predicting disease severity. In this study, we aimed to assess the association between the presence of anemia at admission and incidence of severe disease and death in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Data from all adult patients admitted for COVID-19 in University Hospital "P. Giaccone" Palermo, and University Hospital of Bari, Italy, were retrospectively collected from 1st of September 2020 to 31 August 2022. The association between anemia (defined as Hb < 13 g/dl and < 12 g/dl in males and females, respectively), in-hospital mortality and severe COVID-19 was tested using a Cox's regression analysis. Severe COVID-19 forms were defined as admission to intensive or sub-intensive care unit or a qSOFAscore ≥ 2 or CURB65scores ≥ 3. p values were calculated using the Student's t test for continuous variables and the Mantel-Haenszel Chi-square test for categorical ones. The association between anemia and the mortality was made using a Cox's regression analysis, adjusted, in two models, for the potential confounders and using a propensity score. Among the 1562 patients included in the analysis, prevalence of anemia was 45.1% (95% CI 43-48%). Patients with anemia were significantly older (p < 0.0001), reported more co-morbidities, and presented higher baseline levels of procalcitonin, CRP, ferritin and IL-6. Overall, the crude incidence of mortality was about four times higher in patients with anemia compared to those without. After adjusting for 17 potential confounders, the presence of anemia significantly increased the risk of death (HR = 2.68; 95% CI: 1.59-4.52) and of risk of severe COVID-19 (OR = 2.31; 95% CI: 1.65-3.24). The propensity score analysis substantially confirmed these analyses. Our study provides evidence that, in patients hospitalized for COVID-19, anemia is both associated with a more pronounced baseline pro-inflammatory profile and higher incidence of in-hospital mortality and severe disease.


Тема - темы
Anemia , COVID-19 , Male , Adult , Female , Humans , COVID-19/complications , Retrospective Studies , Anemia/epidemiology , Risk Factors , Disease Progression
2.
J Clin Med ; 12(11)2023 Jun 02.
Статья в английский | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20240141

Реферат

BACKGROUND: Concern has risen about the effects of COVID-19 in interstitial lung disease (ILD) patients. The aim of our study was to determine clinical characteristics and prognostic factors of ILD patients admitted for COVID-19. METHODS: Ancillary analysis of an international, multicenter COVID-19 registry (HOPE: Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation) was performed. The subgroup of ILD patients was selected and compared with the rest of the cohort. RESULTS: A total of 114 patients with ILDs were evaluated. Mean ± SD age was 72.4 ± 13.6 years, and 65.8% were men. ILD patients were older, had more comorbidities, received more home oxygen therapy and more frequently had respiratory failure upon admission than non-ILD patients (all p < 0.05). In laboratory findings, ILD patients more frequently had elevated LDH, C-reactive protein, and D-dimer levels (all p < 0.05). A multivariate analysis showed that chronic kidney disease and respiratory insufficiency on admission were predictors of ventilatory support, and that older age, kidney disease and elevated LDH were predictors of death. CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that ILD patients admitted for COVID-19 are older, have more comorbidities, more frequently require ventilatory support and have higher mortality than those without ILDs. Older age, kidney disease and LDH were independent predictors of mortality in this population.

3.
Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) ; 14: 1167087, 2023.
Статья в английский | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20231746

Реферат

Background: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is one of the most frequent comorbidities in patients suffering from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) with a higher rate of severe course of coronavirus disease (COVID-19). However, data about post-COVID-19 syndrome (PCS) in patients with DM are limited. Methods: This multicenter, propensity score-matched study compared long-term follow-up data about cardiovascular, neuropsychiatric, respiratory, gastrointestinal, and other symptoms in 8,719 patients with DM to those without DM. The 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) according to age and sex resulted in 1,548 matched pairs. Results: Diabetics and nondiabetics had a mean age of 72.6 ± 12.7 years old. At follow-up, cardiovascular symptoms such as dyspnea and increased resting heart rate occurred less in patients with DM (13.2% vs. 16.4%; p = 0.01) than those without DM (2.8% vs. 5.6%; p = 0.05), respectively. The incidence of newly diagnosed arterial hypertension was slightly lower in DM patients as compared to non-DM patients (0.5% vs. 1.6%; p = 0.18). Abnormal spirometry was observed more in patients with DM than those without DM (18.8% vs. 13; p = 0.24). Paranoia was diagnosed more frequently in patients with DM than in non-DM patients at follow-up time (4% vs. 1.2%; p = 0.009). The incidence of newly diagnosed renal insufficiency was higher in patients suffering from DM as compared to patients without DM (4.8% vs. 2.6%; p = 0.09). The rate of readmission was comparable in patients with and without DM (19.7% vs. 18.3%; p = 0.61). The reinfection rate with COVID-19 was comparable in both groups (2.9% in diabetics vs. 2.3% in nondiabetics; p = 0.55). Long-term mortality was higher in DM patients than in non-DM patients (33.9% vs. 29.1%; p = 0.005). Conclusions: The mortality rate was higher in patients with DM type II as compared to those without DM. Readmission and reinfection rates with COVID-19 were comparable in both groups. The incidence of cardiovascular symptoms was higher in patients without DM.


Тема - темы
COVID-19 , Diabetes Mellitus , Humans , Middle Aged , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome , Reinfection , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , Registries , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology
4.
J Clin Med ; 12(2)2023 Jan 16.
Статья в английский | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2200422

Реферат

BACKGROUND: Heart disease is linked to worse acute outcomes after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), although long-term outcomes and prognostic factor data are lacking. We aim to characterize the outcomes and the impact of underlying heart diseases after surviving COVID-19 hospitalization. METHODS: We conducted an analysis of the prospective registry HOPE-2 (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for COVID-19-2, NCT04778020). We selected patients discharged alive and considered the primary end-point all-cause mortality during follow-up. As secondary main end-points, we included any readmission or any post-COVID-19 symptom. Clinical features and follow-up events are compared between those with and without cardiovascular disease. Factors with p < 0.05 in the univariate analysis were entered into the multivariate analysis to determine independent prognostic factors. RESULTS: HOPE-2 closed on 31 December 2021, with 9299 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, and 1805 died during this acute phase. Finally, 7014 patients with heart disease data were included in the present analysis, from 56 centers in 8 countries. Heart disease (+) patients were older (73 vs. 58 years old), more frequently male (63 vs. 56%), had more comorbidities than their counterparts, and suffered more frequently from post-COVID-19 complications and higher mortality (OR heart disease: 2.63, 95% CI: 1.81-3.84). Vaccination was found to be an independent protector factor (HR all-cause death: 0.09; 95% CI: 0.04-0.19). CONCLUSIONS: After surviving the acute phase, patients with underlying heart disease continue to present a more complex clinical profile and worse outcomes including increased mortality. The COVID-19 vaccine could benefit survival in patients with heart disease during follow-up.

5.
Int J Clin Pract ; 2022: 7325060, 2022.
Статья в английский | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1886811

Реферат

Background: Most evidence regarding anticoagulation and COVID-19 refers to the hospitalization setting, but the role of oral anticoagulation (OAC) before hospital admission has not been well explored. We compared clinical outcomes and short-term prognosis between patients with and without prior OAC therapy who were hospitalized for COVID-19. Methods: Analysis of the whole cohort of the HOPE COVID-19 Registry which included patients discharged (deceased or alive) after hospital admission for COVID-19 in 9 countries. All-cause mortality was the primary endpoint. Study outcomes were compared after adjusting variables using propensity score matching (PSM) analyses. Results: 7698 patients were suitable for the present analysis (675 (8.8%) on OAC at admission: 427 (5.6%) on VKAs and 248 (3.2%) on DOACs). After PSM, 1276 patients were analyzed (638 with OAC; 638 without OAC), without significant differences regarding the risk of thromboembolic events (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.59-2.08). The risk of clinically relevant bleeding (OR 3.04, 95% CI 1.92-4.83), as well as the risk of mortality (HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.01-1.47; log-rank p value = 0.041), was significantly increased in previous OAC users. Amongst patients on prior OAC only, there were no differences in the risk of clinically relevant bleeding, thromboembolic events, or mortality when comparing previous VKA or DOAC users, after PSM. Conclusion: Hospitalized COVID-19 patients on prior OAC therapy had a higher risk of mortality and worse clinical outcomes compared to patients without prior OAC therapy, even after adjusting for comorbidities using a PSM. There were no differences in clinical outcomes in patients previously taking VKAs or DOACs. This trial is registered with NCT04334291/EUPAS34399.


Тема - темы
Atrial Fibrillation , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Thromboembolism , Administration, Oral , Anticoagulants/adverse effects , Atrial Fibrillation/drug therapy , Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Hospitalization , Hospitals , Humans , Prognosis , Registries , Thromboembolism/prevention & control
6.
Minerva Med ; 113(4): 667-674, 2022 Aug.
Статья в английский | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1513375

Реферат

BACKGROUND: Cardiac involvement significantly contributes to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mortality.12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) represents a fast, cheap, and easy to perform exam with the adjunctive advantage of the remote reporting possibility. In this study, we sought to investigate if electrocardiographic parameters can identify patients, deemed at low-risk at admission, who will face in-hospital unfavorable course. METHODS: From March 1, 2020, through March 30, 2021, 384 consecutive patients with confirmed low-risk COVID-19 were hospitalized at the University Hospital of Bari (Italy). Criteria for low risk were: admission to the division of Pneumology or Infectious Diseases, no need for immediate (within 24 hours from admission) transfer to Intensive Care Unit or for respiratory support with invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) or for circulation support (either mechanical or pharmacological). Admission ECGs were reviewed and interpreted by two expert cardiologists. The primary outcomes were in-hospital death and the composite outcome of in-hospital death and IMV. RESULTS: In low-risk COVID-19 patients, atrial fibrillation (AF), poor R wave progression (PRWP), tachycardia, and right bundle branch block (RBBB) resulted as statistically significant and independent predictors of in-hospital all-cause mortality; AF, PRWP, Tachycardia, RBBB, and corrected QT interval showed to be statistically significant and independent risk factors for the occurrence of the composite endpoint of death and IMV. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated for the first time that RBBB and PRWP, assessed upon admission with ECG, are associated with unfavorable clinical course in a baseline low-risk population hospitalized for COVID-19.


Тема - темы
COVID-19 , Bundle-Branch Block/epidemiology , COVID-19/diagnosis , Electrocardiography , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Prognosis , Tachycardia
7.
Front Med (Lausanne) ; 8: 728102, 2021.
Статья в английский | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1502328

Реферат

Background: Patients with sepsis with a concomitant coronavirus (COVID-19) infection are related to a high morbidity and mortality rate. We investigated a large cohort of patients with sepsis with a concomitant COVID-19, and we developed a risk score for the estimation of sepsis risk in COVID-19. Methods: We conducted a sub-analysis from the international Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation Registry for COVID-19 (HOPE-COVID-19-Registry, NCT04334291). Out of 5,837 patients with COVID-19, 624 patients were diagnosed with sepsis according to the Sepsis-3 International Consensus. Results: In multivariable analysis, the following risk factors were identified as independent predictors for developing sepsis: current smoking, tachypnoea (>22 breath per minute), hemoptysis, peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) <92%, blood pressure (BP) (systolic BP <90 mmHg and diastolic BP <60 mmHg), Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) <15, elevated procalcitonin (PCT), elevated troponin I (TnI), and elevated creatinine >1.5 mg/dl. By assigning odds ratio (OR) weighted points to these variables, the following three risk categories were defined to develop sepsis during admission: low-risk group (probability of sepsis 3.1-11.8%); intermediate-risk group (24.8-53.8%); and high-risk-group (58.3-100%). A score of 1 was assigned to current smoking, tachypnoea, decreased SpO2, decreased BP, decreased GCS, elevated PCT, TnI, and creatinine, whereas a score of 2 was assigned to hemoptysis. Conclusions: The HOPE Sepsis Score including nine parameters is useful in identifying high-risk COVID-19 patients to develop sepsis. Sepsis in COVID-19 is associated with a high mortality rate.

8.
World J Clin Cases ; 9(25): 7472-7477, 2021 Sep 06.
Статья в английский | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1456541

Реферат

BACKGROUND: Laminopathies are rare diseases, whose cardiac manifestations are heterogeneous and, especially in their initial stage, similar to those of more common conditions, such as ischemic heart disease. Early diagnosis is essential, as these conditions can first manifest themselves with sudden cardiac death. Electrical complications usually appear before structural complications; therefore, it is important to take into consideration these rare genetic disorders for the differential diagnosis of brady and tachyarrhythmias, even when left ventricle systolic function is still preserved. CASE SUMMARY: A 60-year-old man, without history of previous disorders, presented in September 2019 to the emergency department because of the onset of syncope associated with hypotension. The patient was diagnosed with a high-grade atrioventricular block. A dual chamber pacemaker was implanted, but after the onset of a sustained ventricular tachycardia during physical exertion, a drug eluting stent was implanted on an intermediate stenosis on the left anterior descending artery, which had previously been considered non-haemodynamically significant. During the follow-up, the treating cardiologist, suspicious of the overall clinical picture, recommended a genetic test for the diagnosis of cardiomyopathies, which tested positive for a pathogenetic mutation of the lamin A/C gene. While awaiting the result of the genetic test and, later, the pacemaker to be upgraded to a biventricular defibrillator, a remote monitoring device was given to the patient in order to minimize in-person clinical evaluations during the coronavirus disease 2019-related lockdown. CONCLUSION: This case aims to raise awareness of the cardiological manifestations of laminopathies, which can be dangerously misdiagnosed as other, more common conditions.

9.
Clin Microbiol Infect ; 28(2): 273-278, 2022 Feb.
Статья в английский | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1446537

Реферат

OBJECTIVES: To identify predictors of poor prognosis in previously healthy young individuals admitted to hospital with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: We studied a cohort of patients hospitalized with COVID-19. All patients without co-morbidities, without usual treatments and ≤65 years old were selected from an international registry (HOPE-COVID-19, NCT04334291). We focused on baseline variables-symptoms and signs at admission-to analyse risk factors for poor prognosis. The primary end point was a composite of major adverse clinical events during hospitalization including mortality, mechanical ventilation, high-flow nasal oxygen therapy, prone, sepsis, systemic inflammatory response syndrome and embolic events. RESULTS: Overall, 773 healthy young patients were included. The primary composite end point was observed in 29% (225/773) and the overall mortality rate was 3.6% (28/773). In the combined event group, 75% (168/225) of patients were men and the mean age was 49 (±11) years, whereas in the non-combined event group, the prevalence of male gender was 43% (238/548) and the mean age was 42 (±13) years (p < 0.001 for both). On admission, respiratory insufficiency and cough were described in 51.4% (114/222) and 76% (170/223) of patients, respectively, in the combined event group, versus 7.9% (42/533) and 56% (302/543) of patients in the other group (p < 0.001 for both). The strongest independent predictor for the combined end point was desaturation (Spo2 <92%) (OR 5.40; 95% CI 3.34-8.75; p < 0.001), followed by tachypnoea (OR 3.17; 95% CI 1.93-5.21; p < 0.001), male gender (OR 3.01; 95% CI 1.96-4.61; p < 0.001) and pulmonary infiltrates on chest X-ray at admission (OR 2.21; 95% CI 1.18-4.16; p 0.014). CONCLUSIONS: Major adverse clinical events were unexpectedly high considering the baseline characteristics of the cohort. Signs of respiratory compromise at admission and male gender, were predictive for poor prognosis among young healthy patients hospitalized with COVID-19.


Тема - темы
COVID-19 , Respiratory Insufficiency , Adult , Aged , Hospitalization , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prognosis , Respiration, Artificial , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
10.
Eur J Clin Invest ; 51(11): e13582, 2021 Nov.
Статья в английский | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1365071

Реферат

BACKGROUND: A systematic analysis of concomitant arterial hypertension in COVID-19 patients and the impact of angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) have not been studied in a large multicentre cohort yet. We conducted a subanalysis from the international HOPE Registry (https://hopeprojectmd.com, NCT04334291) comparing COVID-19 in presence and absence of arterial hypertension. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Out of 5837 COVID-19 patients, 2850 (48.8%) patients had the diagnosis arterial hypertension. 1978/2813 (70.3%) patients were already treated with ACEI or ARBs. The clinical outcome of the present subanalysis included all-cause mortality over 40 days of follow-up. RESULTS: Patients with arterial hypertension suffered significantly more from different complications including respiratory insufficiency (60.8% vs 39.5%), heart failure (9.9% vs 3.1%), acute kidney injury (25.3% vs 7.3%), pneumonia (90.6% vs 86%), sepsis (14.7% vs 7.5%), and bleeding events (3.6% vs 1.6%). The mortality rate was 29.6% in patients with concomitant arterial hypertension and 11.3% without arterial hypertension (P < .001). Invasive and non-invasive respiratory supports were significantly more required in presence of arterial hypertension as compared without it. In the multivariate cox regression analysis, while age≥65, benzodiazepine, antidepressant at admission, elevated LDH or creatinine, respiratory insufficiency and sepsis might be a positive independent predictors of mortality, antiviral drugs, interferon treatment, ACEI or ARBs at discharge or oral anticoagulation at discharge might be an independent negative predictor of the mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The mortality rate and in-hospital complications might be increased in COVID-19 patients with a concomitant history of arterial hypertension. The history of ACEI or ARBs treatments does not seem to impact the outcome of these patients.


Тема - темы
Acute Kidney Injury/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Heart Failure/epidemiology , Hypertension/epidemiology , Pneumonia/epidemiology , Respiratory Insufficiency/epidemiology , Sepsis/epidemiology , Age Factors , Aged , Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/therapeutic use , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/metabolism , COVID-19/therapy , Creatinine/metabolism , Female , Germany/epidemiology , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Hypertension/drug therapy , Italy/epidemiology , L-Lactate Dehydrogenase/metabolism , Male , Middle Aged , Multivariate Analysis , Noninvasive Ventilation , Proportional Hazards Models , Registries , Respiration, Artificial , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index , Spain/epidemiology
11.
BMJ Nutr Prev Health ; 4(1): 285-292, 2021.
Статья в английский | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1282094

Реферат

BACKGROUND: Smoking has been associated with poorer outcomes in relation to COVID-19. Smokers have higher risk of mortality and have a more severe clinical course. There is paucity of data available on this issue, and a definitive link between smoking and COVID-19 prognosis has yet to be established. METHODS: We included 5224 patients with COVID-19 with an available smoking history in a multicentre international registry Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for COVID-19 (NCT04334291). Patients were included following an in-hospital admission with a COVID-19 diagnosis. We analysed the outcomes of patients with a current or prior history of smoking compared with the non-smoking group. The primary endpoint was all-cause in-hospital death. RESULTS: Finally, 5224 patients with COVID-19 with available smoking status were analysed. A total of 3983 (67.9%) patients were non-smokers, 934 (15.9%) were former smokers and 307 (5.2%) were active smokers. The median age was 66 years (IQR 52.0-77.0) and 58.6% were male. The most frequent comorbidities were hypertension (48.5%) and dyslipidaemia (33.0%). A relevant lung disease was present in 19.4%. In-hospital complications such sepsis (23.6%) and embolic events (4.3%) occurred more frequently in the smoker group (p<0.001 for both). All cause-death was higher among smokers (active or former smokers) compared with non-smokers (27.6 vs 18.4%, p<0.001). Following a multivariate analysis, current smoking was considered as an independent predictor of mortality (OR 1.77, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.82, p=0.017) and a combined endpoint of severe disease (OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.16 to 2.43, p=0.006). CONCLUSION: Smoking has a negative prognostic impact on patients hospitalised with COVID-19.

12.
J Hosp Med ; 16(6): 349-352, 2021 06.
Статья в английский | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1270268

Реферат

Gender-related differences in COVID-19 clinical presentation, disease progression, and mortality have not been adequately explored. We analyzed the clinical profile, presentation, treatments, and outcomes of patients according to gender in the HOPE-COVID-19 International Registry. Among 2,798 enrolled patients, 1,111 were women (39.7%). Male patients had a higher prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors and more comorbidities at baseline. After propensity score matching, 876 men and 876 women were selected. Male patients more often reported fever, whereas female patients more often reported vomiting, diarrhea, and hyposmia/anosmia. Laboratory tests in men presented alterations consistent with a more severe COVID-19 infection (eg, significantly higher C-reactive protein, troponin, transaminases, lymphocytopenia, thrombocytopenia, and ferritin). Systemic inflammatory response syndrome, bilateral pneumonia, respiratory insufficiency, and renal failure were significantly more frequent in men. Men more often required pronation, corticosteroids, and tocilizumab administration. A significantly higher 30-day mortality was observed in men vs women (23.4% vs 19.2%; P = .039). Trial Numbers: NCT04334291/EUPAS34399.


Тема - темы
COVID-19/diagnosis , Hospitalization , Sex Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/mortality , Cohort Studies , Comorbidity , Disease Progression , Female , Heart Disease Risk Factors , Humans , Male , Middle Aged
14.
Crit Care Med ; 49(6): e624-e633, 2021 06 01.
Статья в английский | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1191503

Реферат

OBJECTIVES: No standard therapy, including anticoagulation regimens, is currently recommended for coronavirus disease 2019. Aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of anticoagulation in coronavirus disease 2019 hospitalized patients and its impact on survival. DESIGN: Multicenter international prospective registry (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for Corona Virus Disease 2019). SETTING: Hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019. PATIENTS: Five thousand eight hundred thirty-eight consecutive coronavirus disease 2019 patients. INTERVENTIONS: Anticoagulation therapy, including prophylactic and therapeutic regimens, was obtained for each patient. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Five thousand four hundred eighty patients (94%) did not receive any anticoagulation before hospitalization. Two-thousand six-hundred one patients (44%) during hospitalization received anticoagulation therapy and it was not associated with better survival rate (81% vs 81%; p = 0.94) but with higher risk of bleeding (2.7% vs 1.8%; p = 0.03). Among patients admitted with respiratory failure (49%, n = 2,859, including 391 and 583 patients requiring invasive and noninvasive ventilation, respectively), anticoagulation started during hospitalization was associated with lower mortality rates (32% vs 42%; p < 0.01) and nonsignificant higher risk of bleeding (3.4% vs 2.7%; p = 0.3). Anticoagulation therapy was associated with lower mortality rates in patients treated with invasive ventilation (53% vs 64%; p = 0.05) without increased rates of bleeding (9% vs 8%; p = 0.88) but not in those with noninvasive ventilation (35% vs 38%; p = 0.40). At multivariate Cox' analysis mortality relative risk with anticoagulation was 0.58 (95% CI, 0.49-0.67) in patients admitted with respiratory failure, 0.50 (95% CI, 0.49-0.67) in those requiring invasive ventilation, 0.72 (95% CI, 0.51-1.01) in noninvasive ventilation. CONCLUSIONS: Anticoagulation therapy in general population with coronavirus disease 2019 was not associated with better survival rates but with higher bleeding risk. Better results were observed in patients admitted with respiratory failure and requiring invasive ventilation.


Тема - темы
Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Registries , COVID-19/mortality , Case-Control Studies , Correlation of Data , Cross-Cultural Comparison , Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Hemorrhage/mortality , Hospitalization , Humans , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Prospective Studies , Respiration, Artificial , Respiratory Insufficiency/drug therapy , Respiratory Insufficiency/mortality , Risk , Survival Rate , Treatment Outcome
15.
Am Heart J ; 237: 104-115, 2021 07.
Статья в английский | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1179196

Реферат

BACKGROUND: The use of Renin-Angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been questioned because both share a target receptor site. METHODS: HOPE-COVID-19 (NCT04334291) is an international investigator-initiated registry. Patients are eligible when discharged after an in-hospital stay with COVID-19, dead or alive. Here, we analyze the impact of previous and continued in-hospital treatment with RASi in all-cause mortality and the development of in-stay complications. RESULTS: We included 6503 patients, over 18 years, from Spain and Italy with data on their RASi status. Of those, 36.8% were receiving any RASi before admission. RASi patients were older, more frequently male, with more comorbidities and frailer. Their probability of death and ICU admission was higher. However, after adjustment, these differences disappeared. Regarding RASi in-hospital use, those who continued the treatment were younger, with balanced comorbidities but with less severe COVID19. Raw mortality and secondary events were less frequent in RASi. After adjustment, patients receiving RASi still presented significantly better outcomes, with less mortality, ICU admissions, respiratory insufficiency, need for mechanical ventilation or prone, sepsis, SIRS and renal failure (p<0.05 for all). However, we did not find differences regarding the hospital use of RASi and the development of heart failure. CONCLUSION: RASi historic use, at admission, is not related to an adjusted worse prognosis in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, although it points out a high-risk population. In this setting, the in-hospital prescription of RASi is associated with improved survival and fewer short-term complications.


Тема - темы
Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/therapeutic use , COVID-19 , Heart Failure , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/therapy , Comorbidity , Female , Heart Failure/diagnosis , Heart Failure/epidemiology , Heart Failure/etiology , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Prognosis , Registries , Respiration, Artificial/statistics & numerical data , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index , Spain/epidemiology
16.
Obes Res Clin Pract ; 15(3): 275-280, 2021.
Статья в английский | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1117402

Реферат

BACKGROUND: Obesity has been described as a protective factor in cardiovascular and other diseases being expressed as 'obesity paradox'. However, the impact of obesity on clinical outcomes including mortality in COVID-19 has been poorly systematically investigated until now. We aimed to compare clinical outcomes among COVID-19 patients divided into three groups according to the body mass index (BMI). METHODS: We retrospectively collected data up to May 31st, 2020. 3635 patients were divided into three groups of BMI (<25 kg/m2; n = 1110, 25-30 kg/m2; n = 1464, and >30 kg/m2; n = 1061). Demographic, in-hospital complications, and predictors for mortality, respiratory insufficiency, and sepsis were analyzed. RESULTS: The rate of respiratory insufficiency was more recorded in BMI 25-30 kg/m2 as compared to BMI < 25 kg/m2 (22.8% vs. 41.8%; p < 0.001), and in BMI > 30 kg/m2 than BMI < 25 kg/m2, respectively (22.8% vs. 35.4%; p < 0.001). Sepsis was more observed in BMI 25-30 kg/m2 and BMI > 30 kg/m2 as compared to BMI < 25 kg/m2, respectively (25.1% vs. 42.5%; p = 0.02) and (25.1% vs. 32.5%; p = 0.006). The mortality rate was higher in BMI 25-30 kg/m2 and BMI > 30 kg/m2 as compared to BMI < 25 kg/m2, respectively (27.2% vs. 39.2%; p = 0.31) (27.2% vs. 33.5%; p = 0.004). In the Cox multivariate analysis for mortality, BMI < 25 kg/m2 and BMI > 30 kg/m2 did not impact the mortality rate (HR 1.15, 95% CI: 0.889-1.508; p = 0.27) (HR 1.15, 95% CI: 0.893-1.479; p = 0.27). In multivariate logistic regression analyses for respiratory insufficiency and sepsis, BMI < 25 kg/m2 is determined as an independent predictor for reduction of respiratory insufficiency (OR 0.73, 95% CI: 0.538-1.004; p = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: HOPE COVID-19-Registry revealed no evidence of obesity paradox in patients with COVID-19. However, Obesity was associated with a higher rate of respiratory insufficiency and sepsis but was not determined as an independent predictor for a high mortality.


Тема - темы
Body Mass Index , COVID-19 , Cause of Death , Obesity , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/mortality , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Logistic Models , Male , Middle Aged , Obesity/complications , Obesity/mortality , Proportional Hazards Models , Protective Factors , Registries , Respiratory Insufficiency/etiology , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Sepsis/etiology
17.
Age Ageing ; 50(2): 326-334, 2021 02 26.
Статья в английский | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1114819

Реферат

BACKGROUND: the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is characterized by poor outcomes and mortality, particularly in older patients. METHODS: post hoc analysis of the international, multicentre, 'real-world' HOPE COVID-19 registry. All patients aged ≥65 years hospitalised for COVID-19 were selected. Epidemiological, clinical, analytical and outcome data were obtained. A comparative study between two age subgroups, 65-74 and ≥75 years, was performed. The primary endpoint was all cause in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: about, 1,520 patients aged ≥65 years (60.3% male, median age of 76 [IQR 71-83] years) were included. Comorbidities such as hypertension (69.2%), dyslipidaemia (48.6%), cardiovascular diseases (any chronic heart disease in 38.4% and cerebrovascular disease in 12.5%), and chronic lung disease (25.3%) were prevalent, and 49.6% were on ACEI/ARBs. Patients aged 75 years and older suffered more in-hospital complications (respiratory failure, heart failure, renal failure, sepsis) and a significantly higher mortality (18.4 vs. 48.2%, P < 0.001), but fewer admissions to intensive care units (11.2 vs. 4.8%). In the overall cohort, multivariable analysis demonstrated age ≥75 (OR 3.54), chronic kidney disease (OR 3.36), dementia (OR 8.06), peripheral oxygen saturation at admission <92% (OR 5.85), severe lymphopenia (<500/mm3) (OR 3.36) and qSOFA (Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score) >1 (OR 8.31) to be independent predictors of mortality. CONCLUSION: patients aged ≥65 years hospitalised for COVID-19 had high rates of in-hospital complications and mortality, especially among patients 75 years or older. Age ≥75 years, dementia, peripheral oxygen saturation <92%, severe lymphopenia and qSOFA scale >1 were independent predictors of mortality in this population.


Тема - темы
COVID-19 , Hospital Mortality , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/physiopathology , COVID-19/therapy , Female , Geriatric Assessment/methods , Humans , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , International Cooperation , Male , Mortality , Multimorbidity , Prognosis , Registries/statistics & numerical data , Risk Assessment/methods , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification
18.
Infection ; 49(4): 677-684, 2021 Aug.
Статья в английский | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1107903

Реферат

Olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions (OGD) are a frequent symptom of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). It has been proposed that the neuroinvasive potential of the novel SARS-CoV-2 could be due to olfactory bulb invasion, conversely studies suggest it could be a good prognostic factor. The aim of the current study was to investigate the prognosis value of OGD in COVID-19. These symptoms were recorded on admission from a cohort study of 5868 patients with confirmed or highly suspected COVID-19 infection included in the multicenter international HOPE Registry (NCT04334291). There was statistical relation in multivariate analysis for OGD in gender, more frequent in female 12.41% vs 8.67% in male, related to age, more frequent under 65 years, presence of hypertension, dyslipidemia, diabetes, smoke, renal insufficiency, lung, heart, cancer and neurological disease. We did not find statistical differences in pregnant (p = 0.505), patient suffering cognitive (p = 0.484), liver (p = 0.1) or immune disease (p = 0.32). There was inverse relation (protective) between OGD and prone positioning (0.005) and death (< 0.0001), but no with ICU (0.165) or mechanical ventilation (0.292). On univariable logistic regression, OGD was found to be inversely related to death in COVID-19 patients. The odds ratio was 0.26 (0.15-0.44) (p < 0.001) and Z was - 5.05. The presence of anosmia is fundamental in the diagnosis of SARS.CoV-2 infection, but also could be important in classifying patients and in therapeutic decisions. Even more knowing that it is an early symptom of the disease. Knowing that other situations as being Afro-American or Latino-American, hypertension, renal insufficiency, or increase of C-reactive protein (CRP) imply a worse prognosis we can make a clinical score to estimate the vital prognosis of the patient. The exact pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 that causes olfactory and gustative disorders remains unknown but seems related to the prognosis. This point is fundamental, insomuch as could be a plausible way to find a treatment.


Тема - темы
Anosmia/etiology , COVID-19/complications , SARS-CoV-2 , Taste Disorders/etiology , Aged , Anosmia/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Multivariate Analysis , Prognosis , Registries , Risk Factors , Taste Disorders/epidemiology
19.
Clin Exp Med ; 21(2): 249-268, 2021 May.
Статья в английский | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1068751

Реферат

There is limited information on the presenting characteristics, prognosis, and therapeutic approaches of young patients hospitalized for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We sought to investigate the baseline characteristics, in-hospital treatment, and outcomes of a wide cohort < 65 years admitted for COVID-19. Using the international multicenter HOPE-COVID-19 registry, we evaluated the baseline characteristics, clinical presentation, therapeutic approach, and prognosis of patients < 65 years discharged (deceased or alive) after hospital admission for COVID-19, also compared with the elderly counterpart. Of the included 5746 patients, 2676 were < 65 and 3070 ≥ 65 years. All risk factors and several parameters suggestive of worse clinical presentation augmented through increasing age classes. In-hospital mortality rates were 6.8% and 32.1% in the younger and older cohort, respectively (p < 0.001). Among young patients, mortality, access to ICU and treatment with IMVwere positively correlated with age. Contrariwise, over 65 years of age this trend was broken so that only the association between age and mortality was persistent, while the rates of access to ICU and IMV started to decline. Younger patients also recognized specific predictors of case fatality, such as obesity and gender. Age negatively impacts on mortality, access to ICU and treatment with IMV in patients < 65 years. In elderly patients only case fatality rate keeps augmenting in a stepwise manner through increasing age categories, while therapeutic approaches become more conservative. Besides age, obesity, gender, history of cancer, and severe dyspnea, tachypnea, chest X-ray bilateral abnormalities, abnormal level of creatinine and leucocyte among admission parameters seem to play a central role in the outcome of patients younger than 65 years.


Тема - темы
Aging , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/mortality , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Comorbidity , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Registries , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects , Treatment Outcome , Young Adult , COVID-19 Drug Treatment
20.
Cardiol J ; 28(2): 202-214, 2021.
Статья в английский | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-994025

Реферат

BACKGROUND: The presence of any underlying heart condition could influence outcomes during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: The registry HOPE-COVID-19 (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for COVID-19, NCT04334291) is an international ambispective study, enrolling COVID-19 patients discharged from hospital, dead or alive. RESULTS: HOPE enrolled 2798 patients from 35 centers in 7 countries. Median age was 67 years (IQR: 53.0-78.0), and most were male (59.5%). A relevant heart disease was present in 682 (24%) cases. These were older, more frequently male, with higher overall burden of cardiovascular risk factors (hypertension, dyslipidemia, diabetes mellitus, smoking habit, obesity) and other comorbidities such renal failure, lung, cerebrovascular disease and oncologic antecedents (p < 0.01, for all). The heart cohort received more corticoids (28.9% vs. 20.4%, p < 0.001), antibiotics, but less hydroxychloroquine, antivirals or tocilizumab. Considering the epidemiologic profile, a previous heart condition was independently related with shortterm mortality in the Cox multivariate analysis (1.62; 95% CI 1.29-2.03; p < 0.001). Moreover, heart patients needed more respiratory, circulatory support, and presented more in-hospital events, such heart failure, renal failure, respiratory insufficiency, sepsis, systemic infammatory response syndrome and clinically relevant bleedings (all, p < 0.001), and mortality (39.7% vs. 15.5%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: An underlying heart disease is an adverse prognostic factor for patients suffering COVID-19. Its presence could be related with different clinical drug management and would benefit from maintaining treatment with angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers during in-hospital stay.


Тема - темы
COVID-19/epidemiology , Heart Diseases/epidemiology , Pandemics , Registries , Aged , Comorbidity , Female , Global Health , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prognosis , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2
Критерии поиска