RESUMEN
Objective: To investigate the clinical characteristics and risk factors of patients with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant infection complicated with cardiovascular diseases. Methods: A retrospective analysis of general clinical data was conducted on patients with SARS-CoV-2 omicron infection complicated with hypertension, coronary heart disease, and heart failure admitted to one hospital in Guangdong Province from December 1, 2022, to February 28, 2023. Clinical symptoms, laboratory tests, imaging examinations, treatment, and clinical outcomes were collected. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to analyze the risk factors for mortality in patients with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant infection complicated with cardiovascular diseases. ROC curves were drawn to evaluate the predictive value of CRP, D-dimer, and CK-MB in predicting the risk of death. Results: A total of 364 confirmed cases were included, divided into the asymptomatic group, mild to moderate group, and severe to critically ill group based on the symptoms of COVID-19. There were 216 males (59.34%) and 148 females (40.66%), with a median age of 75 years. The differences between the three groups in terms of sex and age were statistically significant (p < 0.05). The top three underlying diseases were hypertension (288 cases, 79.12%), coronary heart disease (100 cases, 27.47%), and diabetes (84 cases, 23.08%). The differences in unvaccinated and triple-vaccinated patients among the three groups were statistically significant (p < 0.05). The common respiratory symptoms were cough in 237 cases (65.11%) and sputum production in 199 cases (54.67%). In terms of laboratory tests, there were statistically significant differences in neutrophils, lymphocytes, red blood cells, C-reactive protein, D-dimer, aspartate aminotransferase, and creatinine among the three groups (p < 0.05). In imaging examinations, there were statistically significant differences among the three groups in terms of unilateral pulmonary inflammation, bilateral pulmonary inflammation, and bilateral pleural effusion (p < 0.05). There were statistically significant differences among the three groups in terms of antibiotic treatment, steroid treatment, oxygen therapy, nasal cannula oxygen inhalation therapy, non-invasive ventilation, and tracheal intubation ventilation (p < 0.05). Regarding clinical outcomes, there were statistically significant differences among the three groups in terms of mortality (p < 0.05). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that CRP (OR = 1.012, 95% CI = 1.004-1.019) and D-dimer (OR = 1.117, 95% CI = 1.021-1.224) were independent risk factors for patient mortality. The predictive value of CRP, D-dimer, and CK-MB for the risk of death was assessed. D-dimer had the highest sensitivity (95.8%) in predicting patient mortality risk, while CRP had the highest specificity (84.4%). Conclusion: For patients with COVID-19 and concomitant cardiovascular diseases without contraindications, early administration of COVID-19 vaccines and booster shots can effectively reduce the mortality rate of severe cases. Monitoring biomarkers such as CRP, D-dimer, and CK-MB and promptly providing appropriate care can help mitigate the risk of mortality in patients.
RESUMEN
Background: The characteristics of patients with eosinophilia are heterogeneous and the outcomes can vary from asymptomatic to severe. Objective: To describe the feature of patients with eosinophilia in a single center. Design: Based on the electronic medical records from Yangjiang People's Hospital in China, the inpatients admitted between June 2018 and February 2021 with measured blood eosinophil counts were evaluated. Methods: Eosinophilia was defined as a peripheral blood eosinophil count of ≥0.5 × 109/L. Differences were compared by eosinophilia severity. The medical records of patients with moderate to severe eosinophilia were reviewed and summarized in terms of examination, diagnoses and management. And these patients were matched with patients without incidental eosinophilia by propensity score and the differences were compared. Results: A total of 7,835 patients with eosinophilia were identified out of 131,566 total inpatients. All types of eosinophilia were most common in males (8.2%; 5,351/65,615), and in patients aged 0-6 years (11.6%; 1,760/15,204), and in the pediatric (10.8%; 1,764/16,336) department, followed by dermatology (10.6%; 123/1,162), Oncology (7.5%; 394/5,239) and Intensive care unit (ICU) (7.4%; 119/1,608). Patients with moderate to severe eosinophilia were more likely to admit to ICU (moderate: 1.3%; severe: 0.50%). In patients with moderate to severe eosinophilia, only 205/621 (33%) had eosinophilia mentioned in their records, and only 63/621 (10.1%) underwent investigations for eosinophilia. The majority of patients with moderate to severe eosinophilia (372/621, 59.9%) had an infectious disease, and little examination (7.4%; 46/621) was taken to identify the cause of eosinophilia, and only 39/621 (6.3%) of patients had a discrete cause of eosinophilia identified. Patients with moderate to severe eosinophilia (24.3%; 151/621) exhibited certain chance to have organ dysfunction. Conclusion: Incidental eosinophilia in inpatients was frequently neglected and less investigated. Multidisciplinary consultation may improve outcomes of inpatients with moderate to severe eosinophilia.
RESUMEN
Background: Patients with incidental eosinophilia is becoming increasingly common in clinical practice. But it remains challenging to diagnose and treat owing to its complex etiology. The awareness of physicians and the strategies of diagnosis and treatment toward eosinophilia are still unclear. Objective: We aimed to evaluate attention, diagnosis, treatment, and awareness of eosinophilia among physicians, as well as factors influencing clinical practice, and to find ways to improve the efficacy of this disease. Design: This is a cross-sectional survey. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted from 1 to 4 June 2021 in a tertiary hospital. Self-administered and validated electronic questionnaire was used to investigate the attention toward eosinophilia, the strategies of diagnosis and treatment, and the awareness in physicians. Results: A total of 607 valid questionnaires were collected, with a response rate of 84.5%. Among the responders, 65.4% of physicians claimed to be familiar with patients with eosinophilia but only 11.0% of them had read the relevant guidelines or expert consensus. Among 207 physicians who had ever diagnosed patients with eosinophilia, only 19.4% had performed detailed examinations. The accuracy of awareness questions was 1.6-53.5%, and only 26.5% of physicians had high levels of awareness. An increase in the awareness level of up to 2.82 folds was seen among physicians with factors such as job title, encountering patients with eosinophilia, linking patients' conditions to peripheral blood eosinophil count, and paying attention to guidelines. Conclusion: This study highlighted the importance of raising awareness and knowledge of eosinophilia among physicians in China. More works on education about eosinophilia guideline are needed, which may help physicians make decision with more benefits to patients.
RESUMEN
Background and Objective: Growing evidence added to the results from observational studies of lung cancer patients exhibiting eosinophilia. However, whether eosinophils contributed to tumor immune surveillance or neoplastic evolution was unknown. This study aimed to analyze the causal association between eosinophilia and lung cancer. Methods: The causal effect of eosinophil count on lung cancer from a genome-wide association study (GWAS) was investigated using the two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) method. Secondary results according to different histological subtypes of lung cancer were also implemented. Meanwhile, we compared the measured levels of blood eosinophil counts among different subtypes of lung cancer from real-world data. Results: The median absolute eosinophilic count (unit: 109/L) [median (min, max): Lung adenocarcinoma 0.7 (0.5, 15); Squamous cell lung cancer 0.7 (0.5, 1.3); Small cell lung cancer 0.7 (0.6, 1.3); p = 0.96] and the median eosinophil to leukocyte ratio [median (min, max): Lung adenocarcinoma 8.7% (2.1, 42.2%); Squamous cell lung cancer 9.3% (4.1, 17.7%); Small cell lung cancer 8.9% (5.1, 24.1%); p = 0.91] were similar among different histological subtypes of lung cancer. MR methods indicated that eosinophilia may provide 28% higher risk for squamous cell lung cancer in East Asian [Weighted median method: odds ratio (OR) = 1.28, 95% CI: 1.04-1.57, p = 0.02]. Conclusion: Our study suggested that eosinophilia may be a potential causal risk factor in the progression of squamous cell lung cancer in East Asian.
