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.

The state of frailty in research: A mapping review of its clinical applicability to practice.

Research on frailty has expanded in the last decade, but direct evidence supporting its implementation in clinical practice may be limited. This mapping review synthesizes the contexts-of-use and overall clinical applicability of recent pre-COVID frailty research. We sampled 476 articles from articles published on frailty in PubMed and EMBASE in 2017-2018, of which 150 articles were fully appraised for the contexts-of-use, definitions, and interventions. A clinical applicability framework was used to classify articles as practice-changing, practice-informing, or not practice-informing. Of the 476 sampled articles, 31% (n = 150) used frailty in functions that could inform a clinical indication: predictor or mediator (26%, n = 125), selection criterion (3%, n = 15), and effect modifier (2%, n = 10). Articles spanned all health disciplines, and cohort studies comprised 91% (n = 137) of studies and trials 9% (n = 13). Thirty-eight frailty definitions using varied cut-offs and a wide range of interventions were identified. Among all articles, 13% (n = 63) of articles were practice-informing, 2% (n = 11) potentially practice-changing, and 0.2% (n = 1) clearly practice-changing. Lack of well-defined intervention and identifiable effect (96%) or originality (83%) were predominant reasons reducing applicability. Only a minority of recent frailty research provides direct evidence of applicability to practice. Future research on frailty should focus on translating frailty, as a risk factor, into a clinical indication and address definition ambiguity.

The Biobanque québécoise de la COVID-19 (BQC19)-A cohort to prospectively study the clinical and biological determinants of COVID-19 clinical trajectories.

SARS-CoV-2 infection causing the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been responsible for more than 2.8 million deaths and nearly 125 million infections worldwide as of March 2021. In March 2020, the World Health Organization determined that the COVID-19 outbreak is a global pandemic. The urgency and magnitude of this pandemic demanded immediate action and coordination between local, regional, national, and international actors. In that mission, researchers require access to high-quality biological materials and data from SARS-CoV-2 infected and uninfected patients, covering the spectrum of disease manifestations. The "Biobanque québécoise de la COVID-19" (BQC19) is a pan-provincial initiative undertaken in Québec, Canada to enable the collection, storage and sharing of samples and data related to the COVID-19 crisis. As a disease-oriented biobank based on high-quality biosamples and clinical data of hospitalized and non-hospitalized SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive and negative individuals. The BQC19 follows a legal and ethical management framework approved by local health authorities. The biosamples include plasma, serum, peripheral blood mononuclear cells and DNA and RNA isolated from whole blood. In addition to the clinical variables, BQC19 will provide in-depth analytical data derived from the biosamples including whole genome and transcriptome sequencing, proteome and metabolome analyses, multiplex measurements of key circulating markers as well as anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody responses. BQC19 will provide the scientific and medical communities access to data and samples to better understand, manage and ultimately limit, the impact of COVID-19. In this paper we present BQC19, describe the process according to which it is governed and organized, and address opportunities for future research collaborations. BQC19 aims to be a part of a global communal effort addressing the challenges of COVID-19.

Minimizing the Risk of Aerosol Contamination During Elective Lung Resection Surgery.

BACKGROUND: In the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic, the conduct of elective cancer surgery has become an issue because of the need to balance the requirement to treat patients with the possibility of transmission of the virus by asymptomatic carriers. A particular concern is the potential for viral transmission by way of aerosol which may be generated during perioperative care. There are currently no guidelines for the conduct of elective lung resection surgery in this context. METHODS: A working group composed of 1 thoracic surgeon, 2 anesthesiologists and 1 critical care specialist assessed the risk for aerosol during lung resection surgery and proposed steps for mitigation. After external review, a final draft was approved by the Committee for the Governance of Perioperative and Surgical Activities of the Hôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont, in Montreal, Canada. RESULTS: The working group divided the risk for aerosol into 6 time-points: (1) intubation and extubation; (2) Lung isolation and patient positioning; (3) access to the chest; (4) conduct of the surgical procedure; (5) procedure termination and lung re-expansion; (6) chest drainage. Mitigating strategies were proposed for each time-point. CONCLUSIONS: The situation with COVID-19 is an opportunity to re-evaluate operating room protocols both for the purposes of this pandemic and similar situations in the future. In the context of lung resection surgery, specific time points during the procedure seem to pose specific risks for the genesis of aerosol and thus should be the focus of attention.