The predictors and risk factors of two-year rejection in renal transplant patients: A multicenter case-control study.

INTRODUCTION: Kidney transplantation is a definitive treatment for end-stage renal disease. It is associated with improved life expectancy and quality of life. One of the most common complications following kidney transplantation is graft rejection. To our knowledge, no previous study has identified rejection risk factors in kidney transplant recipients in Saudi Arabia. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine the specific risk factors of graft rejection. METHODS: A multicenter case-control study was conducted at four transplant centers in Saudi Arabia. All adult patients who underwent a renal transplant in the period between 01/01/2015 and 31/12/2021 were screened for eligibility. Included patients were categorized into two groups (cases and control) based on the occurrence of biopsy-proven rejection within two years. The primary outcome was to determine the risk factors for rejection within the first two years of transplant. Exact matching was utilized using a 1:4 ratio based on patients' age, gender, and transplant year. RESULTS: Out of 1320 screened renal transplant recipients, 816 patients were included. The overall prevalence of two-year rejection was 13.9%. In bivariate analysis, deceased donor status, the presence Donor Specific Antibody (DSA), intraoperative hypotension, serum Chloride levels, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Candida, and any Infection within two years were linked with increased risk of two-year rejection. However, in the logistic regression analysis, DSA was identified as a significant risk for two-year rejection (Adjusted OR 2.68; 95% CI, 1.10, 6.49, p = 0.03). While, the presence of Panel-reactive antibody (PRA) and higher serum chloride levels one week prior to transplant was associated with lower odds of rejection (Adjusted OR 0.12; 95% CI, 0.03, 0.53, p = 0.005 and Adjusted OR 0.93; 95% CI, 0.86, 0.98, p = 0.02, respectively). Furthermore, blood infection, infected with Pseudomonas aeruginosa or BK virus within two years of transplant was associated with higher odds of two-year rejection (Adjusted OR 3.10; 95% CI, 1.48, 6.48, p = 0.003, Adjusted OR 3.23; 95% CI, 0.87, 11.97, p = 0.08 and Adjusted OR 2.76; 95% CI, 0.89, 8.48, p = 0.07, respectively). CONCLUSION: Our findings emphasize the need for appropriate prevention and management of infections following kidney transplantation to avoid more serious problems, such as rejection, which could significantly raise the likelihood of allograft failure and probably death. Further studies with larger sample size are needed to investigate the impact of serum chloride levels prior to transplant and intraoperative hypotension on the risk of rejection.

The association between tocilizumab therapy and the development of thrombosis in critically ill patients with COVID-19: a multicenter, cohort study.

The use of tocilizumab for the management of COVID-19 emerged since it modulates inflammatory markers by blocking interleukin 6 receptors. Concerns regarding higher thrombosis risk while using tocilizumab were raised in the literature. The aim of this study is to investigate the association between tocilizumab therapy and the development of thromboembolic events in critically ill COVID-19 patients. A propensity score-matched, multicenter cohort study for critically ill adult patients with COVID-19. Eligible patients admitted to ICU between March 2020 and July 2021 were categorized into two sub-cohorts based on tocilizumab use within 24 h of ICU admission. The primary endpoint was to assess the incidence of all thrombosis cases during ICU stay. The secondary endpoints were 30-day mortality, in-hospital mortality, and the highest coagulation parameters follow-up (i.e., D-dimer, Fibrinogen) during the stay. Propensity score matching (1:2 ratio) was based on nine matching covariates. Among a total of 867 eligible patients, 453 patients were matched (1:2 ratio) using propensity scores. The thrombosis events were not statistically different between the two groups in crude analysis (6.8% vs. 7.7%; p-value = 0.71) and regression analysis [OR 0.83, 95% CI (0.385, 1.786)]. Peak D-dimer levels did not change significantly when the patient received tocilizumab (beta coefficient (95% CI): 0.19 (- 0.08, 0.47)), while there was a significant reduction in fibrinogen levels during ICU stay (beta coefficient (95% CI): - 0.15 (- 0.28, - 0.02)). On the other hand, the 30-day and in-hospital mortality were significantly lower in tocilizumab-treated patients (HR 0.57, 95% CI (0.37, 0.87), [HR 0.67, 95% CI (0.46, 0.98), respectively). The use of tocilizumab in critically ill patients with COVID-19 was not associated with higher thrombosis events or peak D-dimer levels. On the other hand, fibrinogen levels, 30-day and in-hospital mortality were significantly lower in the tocilizumab group. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm our findings.

The use of Tocilizumab in COVID-19 critically ill patients with renal impairment: a multicenter, cohort study.

Tocilizumab (TCZ) is recommended in patients with COVID-19 who require oxygen therapy or ventilatory support. Despite the wide use of TCZ, little is known about its safety and effectiveness in patients with COVID-19 and renal impairment. Therefore, this study evaluated the safety and effectiveness of TCZ in critically ill patients with COVID-19 and renal impairment. A multicenter retrospective cohort study included all adult COVID-19 patients with renal impairment (eGFR˂60 mL/min) admitted to the ICUs between March 2020 and July 2021. Patients were categorized into two groups based on TCZ use (Control vs. TCZ). The primary endpoint was the development of acute kidney injury (AKI) during ICU stay. We screened 1599 patients for eligibility; 394 patients were eligible, and 225 patients were included after PS matching (1:2 ratio); there were 75 TCZ-treated subjects and 150 controls. The rate of AKI was higher in the TCZ group compared with the control group (72.2% versus 57.4%; p = 0.03; OR: 1.83; 95% CI: 1.01, 3.34; p = 0.04). Additionally, the ICU length of stay was significantly longer in patients who received TCZ (17.5 days versus 12.5 days; p = 0.006, Beta coefficient: 0.30 days, 95% CI: 0.09, 0.50; p = 0.005). On the other hand, the 30-day and in-hospital mortality were lower in patients who received TCZ compared to the control group (HR: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.27, 0.73; p = 0.01 and HR: 0.63, 95% CI: 0.41, 0.96; p = 0.03, respectively). The use of TCZ in this population was associated with a statistically significantly higher rate of AKI while improving the overall survival on the other hand. Further research is needed to assess the risks and benefits of TCZ treatment in critically ill COVID-19 patients with renal impairment.

When antivirals backfire: An evaluation of favipiravir's clinical outcomes in critically ill patients with COVID-19: A multicenter cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Favipiravir is an oral antiviral, that might treat COVID-19 by enhancing viral eradication, particularly in patients with mild-to-moderate disease. Yet, the findings on the use of favipiravir in critically ill patients with COVID-19 are inconsistent. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of favipiravir in critically ill patients with COVID-19. METHOD: A multicenter retrospective cohort study includes critically ill adult patients with COVID-19 admitted to the intensive care units (ICUs) was conducted from March 2020 to July 2021. Patients were categorized based on favipiravir use (control vs. favipiravir). The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included mechanical ventilation (MV) duration, 30-day mortality, ICU length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, and complications during the stay. RESULTS: After propensity score (PS) matching (1:1 ratio), 146 patients were included in the final analysis. A higher in-hospital and 30-day mortality were observed in patients receiving favipiravir compared to the control group at crude analysis (65.3% vs. 43.8%; P-value=0.009 and 56.3% vs. 40.3; P-value=0.06, respectively); however, no differences were observed using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analysis (HR 1.17; 95% CI 0.73, 1.87; P-value =0.51 and HR 0.86; 95% CI 0.53, 1.39; P-value=0.53, respectively). Conversely, the MV duration and ICU LOS were longer in patients who received favipiravir than the control group (ß coefficient 0.51; CI 0.09, 0.92; P-value = 0.02, ß coefficient 0.41; CI 0.17, 0.64; P-value = 0.0006, respectively). Complications during the stay were comparable between the two groups. CONCLUSION: The use of favipiravir in critically ill patients with COVID-19 did not demonstrate a reduction in mortality; instead, it was linked with longer MV duration and ICU stay. This finding suggests limiting favipiravir use to infections where it is more effective, other than COVID-19. Further randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings.

Evaluation of Early Tocilizumab Effect on Multiorgan Dysfunction in Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19: A Propensity Score-Matched Study.

Background: Tocilizumab (TCZ) has been proposed as potential rescue therapy for severe COVID-19. No previous study has primarily assessed the role of TCZ in preventing severe COVID-19-related multiorgan dysfunction. Hence, this multicenter cohort study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of TCZ early use versus standard of care in preventing severe COVID-19-related multiorgan dysfunction in COVID-19 critically ill patients during intensive care unit (ICU) stay. Methods: A multicenter, retrospective cohort study includes critically ill adult patients with COVID-19 admitted to the ICUs. Patients were categorized into two groups, the treatment group includes patients who received early TCZ therapy within 24 hours of ICU admission and the control group includes patients who received standard of care. The primary outcome was the multiorgan dysfunction on day three of the ICU admission. The secondary outcomes were 30-day, and in-hospital mortality, ventilator-free days, hospital length of stay (LOS), ICU LOS, and ICU-related complications. Results: After propensity score matching, 300 patients were included in the analysis based on predefined criteria with a ratio of 1:2. Patients who received TCZ had lower multiorgan dysfunction score on day three of ICU admission compared to the control group (beta coefficient: -0.13, 95% CI: -0.26, -0.01, P-value = 0.04). Moreover, respiratory failure requiring MV was statistically significantly lower in patients who received early TCZ compared to the control group (OR 0.52; 95% CI 0.31, 0.91, P-value = 0.02). The 30-day and in-hospital mortality were significantly lower in patients who received TCZ than those who did not (HR 0.56; 95% CI 0.37, 0.85, P-value = 0 .006 and HR 0.54; 95% CI 0.36, 0.82, P-value = 0.003, respectively). Conclusion: In addition to the mortality benefits associated with early TCZ use within 24 hours of ICU admission, the use of TCZ was associated with a significantly lower multiorgan dysfunction score on day three of ICU admission in critically ill patients with COVID-19.

Early dexamethasone use as a protective measure in non-mechanically ventilated critically ill patients with COVID-19: a multicenter, cohort study.

Dexamethasone showed mortality benefits in patients with COVID-19. However, the optimal timing for dexamethasone initiation to prevent COVID-19 consequences such as respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation (MV) is debatable. As a result, the purpose of this study is to assess the impact of early dexamethasone initiation in non-MV critically ill patients with COVID19. This is a multicenter cohort study including adult patients with confirmed COVID-19 admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) and received systemic dexamethasone between March 2020 and March 2021. Patients were categorized into two groups based on the timing for dexamethasone initiation (early vs. late). Patients who were initiated dexamethasone within 24 h of ICU admission were considered in the early group. The primary endpoint was developing respiratory failure that required MV; other outcomes were considered secondary. Propensity score matching (1:1 ratio) was used based on the patient's SOFA score, MV status, prone status, and early use of tocilizumab within 24 h of ICU admission. Among 208 patients matched using propensity score, one hundred four patients received dexamethasone after 24 h of ICU admission. Among the non-mechanically ventilated patients, late use of dexamethasone was associated with higher odds of developing respiratory failure that required MV (OR [95%CI]: 2.75 [1.12, 6.76], p = 0.02). Additionally, late use was associated with longer hospital length of stay (LOS) (beta coefficient [95%CI]: 0.55 [0.22, 0.88], p = 0.001). The 30-day and in-hospital mortality were higher in the late group; however, they were not statistically significant. In non-mechanically ventilated patients, early dexamethasone use within 24 hours of ICU admission in critically ill patients with COVID-19 could be considered a proactive protective measure.

The safety and effectiveness of tocilizumab in older adult critically ill patients with COVID-19: a multicenter, cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Evidence supports tocilizumab (TCZ) benefit and safety in adult patients with severe COVID-19. However, its effectiveness in critically ill older adult patients remains questionable. Thus, the study aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of TCZ in older critically ill patients with COVID-19. METHODS: A multicenter, retrospective study for all critically ill older adults (aged ≥65 years) with confirmed COVID-19 infection and admitted to the intensive care units (ICUs). Eligible patients were categorized into two groups based on TCZ use during ICU stay (control vs TCZ). Propensity score (PS) matching was used (1:1 ratio) based on the selected criteria. The primary outcome was the in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: A total of 368 critically ill older adult patients were included in the study. Fifty one patients (13.8%) received TCZ. The in-hospital mortality was lower in the TCZ group (HR 0.41; 95% CI 0.22-0.76, P-value = 0.005). Patients who received TCZ had lower odds of respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation (OR [95% CI]: 0.32 [0.10-0.98], P-value = 0.04). No statistically significant differences were found between the two groups for 30-days mortality, ventilator-free days, length of stay, and complications during ICU stay. CONCLUSION: Tocilizumab use in critically ill older adult patients with COVID-19 is associated with lower in-hospital mortality and a similar safety profile.

Comparison between standard Vs. Escalated dose venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in critically ill patients with COVID-19: A two centers, observational study.

INTRODUCTION: The risk of mortality in patients with COVID-19 was found to be significantly higher in patients who experienced thromboembolic events. Thus, several guidelines recommend using prophylactic anticoagulants in all COVID-19 hospitalized patients. However, there is uncertainty about the appropriate dosing regimen and safety of anticoagulation in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Thus, this study aims to compare the effectiveness and safety of standard versus escalated dose pharmacological venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in critically ill patients with COVID-19. METHODS: A two-center retrospective cohort study including critically ill patients aged ≥ 18-years with confirmed COVID-19 admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) at two tertiary hospitals in Saudi Arabia from March 1st, 2020, until January 31st, 2021. Patients who received either Enoxaparin 40 mg daily or Unfractionated heparin 5000 Units three times daily were grouped under the "standard dose VTE prophylaxis and patients who received higher than the standard dose but not as treatment dose were grouped under "escalated VTE prophylaxis dose". The primary outcome was the occurance of thrombotic events, and the secondary outcomes were bleeding, mortality, and other ICU-related complications. RESULTS: A total of 758 patients were screened; 565 patients were included in the study. We matched 352 patients using propensity score matching (1:1). In patients who received escalated dose pharmacological VTE prophylaxis, any case of thrombosis and VTE were similar between the two groups (OR 1.22;95 %CI 0.52-2.86; P = 0.64 and OR 0.75; 95% CI 0.16-3.38; P = 0.70 respectively). However, the odds of minor bleeding was higher in patients who received escalated VTE prophylaxis dose (OR 3.39; 95% CI 1.08-10.61; P = 0.04). There was no difference in the 30-day mortality nor in-hospital mortality between the two groups (HR 1.17;95 %CI0.79-1.73; P = 0.43 and HR 1.08;95 %CI 0.76-1.53; P = 0.83, respectively). CONCLUSION: Escalated-dose pharmacological VTE prophylaxis in critically ill patients with COVID-19 was not associated with thrombosis, or mortality benefits but led to an increased risk of minor bleeding. This study supports previous evidence regarding the optimal dosing VTE pharmacological prophylaxis regimen for critically ill patients with COVID-19.

The impact of early target attainment of vancomycin in critically ill patients with confirmed Gram-positive infection: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Vancomycin is a commonly used antibiotic in critically ill patients for various indications. Critical illness imposes pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamics challenges, which makes optimizing vancomycin in this population cumbersome. Data are scarce on the clinical impact of time to therapeutic trough levels of vancomycin in critically ill patients.  This study aims to evaluate the timing to achieve therapeutic trough level of vancomycin on 30-day mortality in critically ill patients. METHOD: A retrospective cohort study was conducted for all adult critically ill patients with confirmed Gram-positive infection who received IV vancomycin between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2020. We compared early (< 48 h) versus late (≥ 48 h) attainment of vancomycin therapeutic trough levels. The primary outcome was the 30-day mortality in critically ill patients. Secondary outcomes were the development of resistant organisms, microorganisms eradication within 4-5 days of vancomycin initiation, acute kidney injury (AKI), and length of stay (LOS). Propensity score-matched (1:1 ratio) used based on patient's age, serum creatinine, and albumin values at baseline. RESULTS: A total of 326 patients were included; 110 patients attained the therapeutic trough levels within 48 h of vancomycin initiation. Late achievement of the therapeutic trough levels was associated with higher 30-day mortality (HR: 2.54; 95% CI [1.24-5.22]; p = 0.01). Additionally, patients who achieved therapeutic trough levels of vancomycin late were more likely to develop AKI (OR = 2.59; 95% CI [1.01-6.65]; p = 0.04). Other outcomes were not statistically significant between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Early achievement of vancomycin therapeutic levels in patients with confirmed Gram-positive infection was associated with possible survival benefits.

Evaluation of zinc sulfate as an adjunctive therapy in COVID-19 critically ill patients: a two center propensity-score matched study.

BACKGROUND: Zinc is a trace element that plays a role in stimulating innate and acquired immunity. The role of zinc in critically ill patients with COVID-19 remains unclear. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of zinc sulfate as adjunctive therapy in critically ill patients with COVID-19. METHODS: Patients aged ≥ 18 years with COVID-19 who were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) in two tertiary hospitals in Saudi Arabia were retrospectively assessed for zinc use from March 1, 2020 until March 31, 2021. After propensity score matching (1:1 ratio) based on the selected criteria, we assessed the association of zinc used as adjunctive therapy with the 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included the in-hospital mortality, ventilator free days, ICU length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, and complication (s) during ICU stay. RESULTS: A total of 164 patients were included, 82 patients received zinc. Patients who received zinc sulfate as adjunctive therapy have a lower 30-day mortality (HR 0.52, CI 0.29, 0.92; p = 0.03). On the other hand, the in-hospital mortality was not statistically significant between the two groups (HR 0.64, CI 0.37-1.10; p = 0.11). Zinc sulfate use was associated with a lower odds of acute kidney injury development during ICU stay (OR 0.46 CI 0.19-1.06; p = 0.07); however, it did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSION: The use of zinc sulfate as an additional treatment in critically ill COVID-19 patients may improve survival. Furthermore, zinc supplementation may have a protective effect on the kidneys.

How Do Pelvic Parameters Correlate With Postoperative Outcomes When the Parameters Are Not Measured Preoperatively in Patients Undergoing Instrumented Lumbar Fusion?

OBJECTIVE: A normal age-adjusted sagittal alignment is an important factor in achieving long-term functional results after lumbar spinal fusion. We aim to determine if the changes in spino-pelvic alignment (SPA) correlate with post-operative functional outcomes in patients who underwent instrumented lumbar spine surgery when the parameters were not measured before. METHOD: A retrospective review of medical records from 2012 to 2016, and radiographs of the patients who underwent instrumented fusion of the lumbar spine. The X-rays of the available preoperative lumbar spine were reviewed for SPA and compared with the last follow-up postoperative images. The patients were contacted by telephone to complete the EuroQoL 5 Dimensions 5-level questionnaire and visual analog scale for evaluation of their functional outcomes during 2017. Correlation studies were performed using Pearson's coefficient. RESULTS: Forty-six patients were included with a mean age of 53 years and a follow-up of 47 months. There was a significant improvement in the functional outcomes and pain in the whole group. All the patients showed improvement in their SPA, and those who underwent more than two levels of fusion showed a significant improvement (P<0.05). Lumbar lordosis and sacral slope had a significant correlation with postoperative clinical improvement (R=0.8). CONCLUSION: The study showed that single or double fusion has significant improvement in pain and functional outcome with a significant change in SPA.

Ascorbic acid as an adjunctive therapy in critically ill patients with COVID-19: a propensity score matched study.

Ascorbic acid represents an appealing option for clinicians to utilize in the context of the global COVID-19 pandemic due to its proposed clinical efficacy, relative safety, and low cost. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of using ascorbic acid in supplemental doses as adjunctive therapy for patients critically ill with COVID-19. This was a two-center, non-interventional, retrospective cohort study. All critically ill adult patients admitted to ICU with a confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis between March 1st and December 31st, 2020, were included in the final analysis. The study was conducted at two large governmental tertiary hospitals in Saudi Arabia. The purpose was to investigate the clinical outcomes of low-dose ascorbic acid as adjunctive therapy in COVID-19 after propensity score matching using baseline severity scores, systematic use of corticosteroids, and study centers. A number of 739 patients were included in this study, among whom 296 patients were included after propensity score matching. There was no association between the administration of ascorbic acid and in-hospital mortality or the 30-day mortality [OR (95% CI) 0.77 (0.47, 1.23), p value = 0.27 and OR (95% CI) 0.73 (0.43, 1.20), p value = 0.21, respectively]. Using ascorbic acid was associated with a lower incidence of thrombosis compared with the non-ascorbic-acid group [6.1% vs. 13% respectively; OR (95% CI) 0.42 (0.184, 0.937), p value = 0.03]. Low dose of ascorbic acid as an adjunctive therapy in COVID-19 critically ill patients was not associated with mortality benefits, but it was associated with a lower incidence of thrombosis. Further studies are required to confirm these findings.

Evaluation of thiamine as adjunctive therapy in COVID-19 critically ill patients: a two-center propensity score matched study.

BACKGROUND: Thiamine is a precursor of the essential coenzyme thiamine pyrophosphate required for glucose metabolism; it improves the immune system function and has shown to reduce the risk of several diseases. The role of thiamine in critically ill septic patient has been addressed in multiple studies; however, it's role in COVID-19 patients is still unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of thiamine as an adjunctive therapy on mortality in COVID-19 critically ill patients. METHODS: This is a two-center, non-interventional, retrospective cohort study for critically ill patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID19. All patients aged 18 years or older admitted to ICUs between March 1, 2020, and December 31, 2020, with positive PCR COVID-19 were eligible for inclusion. We investigated thiamine use as an adjunctive therapy on the clinical outcomes in critically ill COVID-19 patients after propensity score matching. RESULTS: A total of 738 critically ill patients with COVID-19 who had been admitted to ICUs were included in the study. Among 166 patients matched using the propensity score method, 83 had received thiamine as adjunctive therapy. There was significant association between thiamine use with in-hospital mortality (OR = 0.39; 95% CI 0.19-0.78; P value = 0.008) as well as the 30-day mortality (OR = 0.37; 95% CI 0.18-0.78; P value = 0.009). Moreover, patients who received thiamine as an adjunctive therapy were less likely to have thrombosis during ICU stay [OR (95% CI) 0.19 (0.04-0.88), P value = 0.03]. CONCLUSION: Thiamine use as adjunctive therapy may have potential survival benefits in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Additionally, it was associated with a lower incidence of thrombosis. Further interventional studies are required to confirm these findings.

Clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with heart failure admitted to the intensive care unit with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): A multicenter cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with underlying heart failure (HF) in the setting of COVID-19 who require admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) might present with a unique set of challenges. This study aims to extensively describe the characteristics and outcomes of patients with HF who were admitted to ICU with COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter retrospective analysis for all adult patients with HF and an objectively confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 who were admitted to ICUs between March 1 and August 31, 2020, in Saudi Arabia. RESULTS: A total of 723 critically ill patients with COVID-19 were admitted into ICUs during the study period: 59 patients with HF and 664 patients with no HF before admission to ICU. Patients with HF had statistically significant more comorbidities, including diabetes mellitus, hypertension, dyslipidemia, atrial fibrillation, and acute coronary syndrome. Moreover, higher baseline severity scores (APACHE II & SOFA score) and nutritional risk (NUTRIC score) were observed in HF patients. Overall, patients with HF had more in-hospital and ICU deaths in comparison to patients without HF: (64.3% vs. 44.6%, P-value <0.01) and (54.5% vs. 39%, P-value = 0.02), respectively. Patients with HF had a similar incidence of thrombosis, ICU length of stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, and hospital length of stay compared to patients with no HF. CONCLUSION: In this study, patients with HF had more in-hospital and ICU deaths than patients with no HF. Thus, history of HF could be used to help direct case management during hospitalization and possibly dictate proactive COVID-19 care.

Impact of Helicobacter pylori on hematological parameters among Saudi population.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate prevalence and association between iron deficiency anemia (IDA) and Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori). METHODS: This cross-sectional study included 79 participants with unexplained IDA. The study was carried out between November 2018 to April 2020 in the College of Medicine, Umm Al-Qura University in collaboration with Al-Noor Specialist Hospital, Makkah, Saudi Arabia. Complete blood count (CBC), serum iron, and ferritin levels were measured. Anti-H. pylori antibody was detected using anti-H. pylori immunoglobulin G enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). RESULTS: The prevalence of H. pylori infection among IDA patients was 62%. There was a significant difference between female and male subjects with a positive H. pylori status (p=0.001). There was also a significant difference between females and males with a positive H. pylori infection according to red blood cell count, hematocrit, mean corpuscular volume, and mean cor-puscular hemoglobin (p=0.001). CONCLUSION: The current study shows an association between H. pylori infection and unexplained IDA with significant difference between postmenopausal Saudi females and males. This will lead to more effective treatment in IDA and the eradication of H. pylori, as well as the prevention of recurrence, which are necessary and may provide a significant reduction in the overall disease burden.

Clinical features and outcomes of critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): A multicenter cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) manifested by a broad spectrum of symptoms, ranging from asymptomatic manifestations to severe illness and death. The purpose of the study was to extensively describe the clinical features and outcomes in critically ill patients with COVID-19 in Saudi Arabia. METHOD: This was a multicenter, non-interventional cohort study for all critically ill patients aged 18 years or older, admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) between March 1 to August 31, 2020, with an objectively confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19. The diagnosis of COVID-19 was confirmed by Reverse Transcriptase-Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) on nasopharyngeal and/or throat swabs. Multivariate logistic regression and generalized linear regression were used. We considered a P value of <0.05 statistically significant. RESULTS: A total of 560 patients met the inclusion criteria. An extensive list of clinical features was associated with higher 30-day ICU mortality rates, such as requiring mechanical ventilation (MV) or developing acute kidney injury within 24 hours of ICU admission, higher body temperature, white blood cells, blood glucose level, serum creatinine, fibrinogen, procalcitonin, creatine phosphokinase, aspartate aminotransferase, and total iron-binding capacity. During ICU stay, the most common complication was respiratory failure that required MV (71.4%), followed by acute kidney injury (AKI) and thrombosis with a proportion of 46.8% and 11.4%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Among patients with COVID-19 who were admitted to the ICU, several variables were associated with an increased risk of ICU mortality at 30 days. Respiratory failure that required MV, AKI, and thrombosis were the most common complications during ICU stay.

Clinical cure with ceftriaxone versus ceftaroline or ceftobiprole in the treatment of staphylococcal pneumonia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Ceftriaxone is an empirical antibiotic commonly used to treat pneumonia. However, its use to treat infections caused by methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) is controversial given limited evidence of its clinical efficacy. The objective of this study was to compare the clinical efficacy of ceftriaxone with either ceftaroline or ceftobiprole in the treatment of pneumonia caused by MSSA. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing clinical cure in patients with pneumonia who received ceftriaxone versus those who received either ceftaroline or ceftobiprole was conducted. Patients who received ceftriaxone plus vancomycin were excluded. The PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases as well as clinical trial registries were searched up to 8 June 2018. Risk differences (RDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using a random-effects model and assessing for heterogeneity (I2). A total of five RCTs met the inclusion criteria; four used ceftaroline and one used ceftobiprole. Four studies included adults and one included paediatric patients. The adult studies included non-intensive care unit patients with mild-to-moderate community-acquired pneumonia. Clinical cure was statistically lower with ceftriaxone (RD, -28.5%, 95% CI -53.5% to -3.4%; P = 0.026; I2 = 16.321%) than with ceftaroline or ceftobiprole. In conclusion, ceftriaxone use was associated with higher clinical failure of MSSA pneumonia compared with ceftaroline or ceftobiprole. This supports the notion that ceftriaxone is not an ideal agent for the treatment of MSSA infections and adds new evidence against its use for MSSA pneumonia.

Plazomicin: A Novel Aminoglycoside for the Treatment of Resistant Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections.

Plazomicin is a novel semisynthetic parenteral aminoglycoside that inhibits bacterial protein synthesis. It was approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for use in adults with complicated urinary tract infections (cUTI), including pyelonephritis. Plazomicin displays potent in vitro activity against Enterobacteriaceae, including both extended-spectrum ß-lactamase-producing and carbapenem-resistant isolates. Plazomicin's enhanced Enterobacteriaceae activity is due to its stability to commonly encountered aminoglycoside-modifying enzymes that compromise the activity of traditional aminoglycosides. Plazomicin resistance in Enterobacteriaceae is via modification of the ribosomal binding site due to expression of 16S rRNA methyltransferases. Plazomicin does not display improved activity over traditional aminoglycosides against other problematic resistant Gram-negative bacteria, namely Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Acinetobacter baumannii. Plazomicin has been assessed in two phase III randomized controlled trials. The EPIC trial compared plazomicin and meropenem for the management of cUTI. In this trial, plazomicin demonstrated superiority in composite cure (81.7% vs 70.1%; difference 11.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.7-25.7) at the test-of-cure visit, which was driven by enhanced sustained microbiological eradication. The CARE trial compared plazomicin-based and colistin-based combinations in patients with serious infections due to carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE). In this analysis, plazomicin-based combinations were associated with numerically decreased mortality or serious disease-related complications when compared with colistin-based combinations (23.5% vs 50%, respectively; 90% CI -0.7 to 51.2). Furthermore, plazomicin was also associated with a lower incidence of nephrotoxicity than colistin. However, small sample sizes limit the interpretation of the findings in the CARE trial. Plazomicin is a novel aminoglycoside that offers clinicians an additional option for the management of CRE infections, with superior activity compared with traditional aminoglycosides and potentially improved efficacy and decreased toxicity compared with colistin.