Clinical Features and Risk Factors for Mortality Among Long-term Care Facility Residents Hospitalized Due to COVID-19 in Spain.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 severely impacted older adults and long-term care facility (LTCF) residents. Our primary aim was to describe differences in clinical and epidemiological variables, in-hospital management, and outcomes between LTCF residents and community-dwelling older adults hospitalized with COVID-19. The secondary aim was to identify risk factors for mortality due to COVID-19 in hospitalized LTCF residents. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional analysis within a retrospective cohort of hospitalized patients ≥75 years with confirmed COVID-19 admitted to 160 Spanish hospitals. Differences between groups and factors associated with mortality among LTCF residents were assessed through comparisons and logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Of 6 189 patients ≥75 years, 1 185 (19.1%) were LTCF residents and 4 548 (73.5%) were community-dwelling. LTCF residents were older (median: 87.4 vs 82.1 years), mostly female (61.6% vs 43.2%), had more severe functional dependence (47.0% vs 7.8%), more comorbidities (Charlson Comorbidity Index: 6 vs 5), had dementia more often (59.1% vs 14.4%), and had shorter duration of symptoms (median: 3 vs 6 days) than community-dwelling patients (all, p < .001). Mortality risk factors in LTCF residents were severe functional dependence (adjusted odds ratios [aOR]: 1.79; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.13-2.83; p = .012), dyspnea (1.66; 1.16-2.39; p = .004), SatO2 < 94% (1.73; 1.27-2.37; p = .001), temperature ≥ 37.8°C (1.62; 1.11-2.38; p = .013); qSOFA index ≥ 2 (1.62; 1.11-2.38; p = .013), bilateral infiltrates (1.98; 1.24-2.98; p < .001), and high C-reactive protein (1.005; 1.003-1.007; p < .001). In-hospital mortality was initially higher among LTCF residents (43.3% vs 39.7%), but lower after adjusting for sex, age, functional dependence, and comorbidities (aOR: 0.74, 95%CI: 0.62-0.87; p < .001). CONCLUSION: Basal functional status and COVID-19 severity are risk factors of mortality in LTCF residents. The lower adjusted mortality rate in LTCF residents may be explained by earlier identification, treatment, and hospitalization for COVID-19.

Estimation of Admission D-dimer Cut-off Value to Predict Venous Thrombotic Events in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: Analysis of the SEMI-COVID-19 Registry.

BACKGROUND: Venous thrombotic events (VTE) are frequent in COVID-19, and elevated plasma D-dimer (pDd) and dyspnea are common in both entities. OBJECTIVE: To determine the admission pDd cut-off value associated with in-hospital VTE in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: Multicenter, retrospective study analyzing the at-admission pDd cut-off value to predict VTE and anticoagulation intensity along hospitalization due to COVID-19. RESULTS: Among 9386 patients, 2.2% had VTE: 1.6% pulmonary embolism (PE), 0.4% deep vein thrombosis (DVT), and 0.2% both. Those with VTE had a higher prevalence of tachypnea (42.9% vs. 31.1%; p = 0.0005), basal O2 saturation <93% (45.4% vs. 33.1%; p = 0.0003), higher at admission pDd (median [IQR]: 1.4 [0.6-5.5] vs. 0.6 [0.4-1.2] µg/ml; p < 0.0001) and platelet count (median [IQR]: 208 [158-289] vs. 189 [148-245] platelets × 109/L; p = 0.0013). A pDd cut-off of 1.1 µg/ml showed specificity 72%, sensitivity 49%, positive predictive value (PPV) 4%, and negative predictive value (NPV) 99% for in-hospital VTE. A cut-off value of 4.7 µg/ml showed specificity of 95%, sensitivity of 27%, PPV of 9%, and NPV of 98%. Overall mortality was proportional to pDd value, with the lowest incidence for each pDd category depending on anticoagulation intensity: 26.3% for those with pDd >1.0 µg/ml treated with prophylactic dose (p < 0.0001), 28.8% for pDd for patients with pDd >2.0 µg/ml treated with intermediate dose (p = 0.0001), and 31.3% for those with pDd >3.0 µg/ml and full anticoagulation (p = 0.0183). CONCLUSIONS: In hospitalized patients with COVID-19, a pDd value greater than 3.0 µg/ml can be considered to screen VTE and to consider full-dose anticoagulation.

Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin Receptor Blockers Withdrawal Is Associated with Higher Mortality in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19.

Our main aim was to describe the effect on the severity of ACEI (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor) and ARB (angiotensin II receptor blocker) during COVID-19 hospitalization. A retrospective, observational, multicenter study evaluating hospitalized patients with COVID-19 treated with ACEI/ARB. The primary endpoint was the incidence of the composite outcome of prognosis (IMV (invasive mechanical ventilation), NIMV (non-invasive mechanical ventilation), ICU admission (intensive care unit), and/or all-cause mortality). We evaluated both outcomes in patients whose treatment with ACEI/ARB was continued or withdrawn. Between February and June 2020, 11,205 patients were included, mean age 67 years (SD = 16.3) and 43.1% female; 2162 patients received ACEI/ARB treatment. ACEI/ARB treatment showed lower all-cause mortality (p < 0.0001). Hypertensive patients in the ACEI/ARB group had better results in IMV, ICU admission, and the composite outcome of prognosis (p < 0.0001 for all). No differences were found in the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events. Patients previously treated with ACEI/ARB continuing treatment during hospitalization had a lower incidence of the composite outcome of prognosis than those whose treatment was withdrawn (RR 0.67, 95%CI 0.63-0.76). ARB was associated with better survival than ACEI (HR 0.77, 95%CI 0.62-0.96). ACEI/ARB treatment during COVID-19 hospitalization was associated with protection on mortality. The benefits were greater in hypertensive, those who continued treatment, and those taking ARB.

Risk Categories in COVID-19 Based on Degrees of Inflammation: Data on More Than 17,000 Patients from the Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 Registry.

(1) Background: The inflammation or cytokine storm that accompanies COVID-19 marks the prognosis. This study aimed to identify three risk categories based on inflammatory parameters on admission. (2) Methods: Retrospective cohort study of patients diagnosed with COVID-19, collected and followed-up from 1 March to 31 July 2020, from the nationwide Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 Registry. The three categories of low, intermediate, and high risk were determined by taking into consideration the terciles of the total lymphocyte count and the values of C-reactive protein, lactate dehydrogenase, ferritin, and D-dimer taken at the time of admission. (3) Results: A total of 17,122 patients were included in the study. The high-risk group was older (57.9 vs. 64.2 vs. 70.4 years; p < 0.001) and predominantly male (37.5% vs. 46.9% vs. 60.1%; p < 0.001). They had a higher degree of dependence in daily tasks prior to admission (moderate-severe dependency in 10.8% vs. 14.1% vs. 17%; p < 0.001), arterial hypertension (36.9% vs. 45.2% vs. 52.8%; p < 0.001), dyslipidemia (28.4% vs. 37% vs. 40.6%; p < 0.001), diabetes mellitus (11.9% vs. 17.1% vs. 20.5%; p < 0.001), ischemic heart disease (3.7% vs. 6.5% vs. 8.4%; p < 0.001), heart failure (3.4% vs. 5.2% vs. 7.6%; p < 0.001), liver disease (1.1% vs. 3% vs. 3.9%; p = 0.002), chronic renal failure (2.3% vs. 3.6% vs. 6.7%; p < 0.001), cancer (6.5% vs. 7.2% vs. 11.1%; p < 0.001), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (5.7% vs. 5.4% vs. 7.1%; p < 0.001). They presented more frequently with fever, dyspnea, and vomiting. These patients more frequently required high flow nasal cannula (3.1% vs. 4.4% vs. 9.7%; p < 0.001), non-invasive mechanical ventilation (0.9% vs. 3% vs. 6.3%; p < 0.001), invasive mechanical ventilation (0.6% vs. 2.7% vs. 8.7%; p < 0.001), and ICU admission (0.9% vs. 3.6% vs. 10.6%; p < 0.001), and had a higher percentage of in-hospital mortality (2.3% vs. 6.2% vs. 23.9%; p < 0.001). The three risk categories proved to be an independent risk factor in multivariate analyses. (4) Conclusion: The present study identifies three risk categories for the requirement of high flow nasal cannula, mechanical ventilation, ICU admission, and in-hospital mortality based on lymphopenia and inflammatory parameters.

Cardiometabolic Therapy and Mortality in Very Old Patients With Diabetes Hospitalized due to COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The effects of cardiometabolic drugs on the prognosis of diabetic patients with COVID-19, especially very old patients, are not well known. This work was aimed to analyze the association between preadmission cardiometabolic therapy (antidiabetic, antiaggregant, antihypertensive, and lipid-lowering drugs) and in-hospital mortality among patients ≥80 years with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) hospitalized for COVID-19. METHOD: We conducted a nationwide, multicenter, observational study in patients ≥80 years with T2DM hospitalized for COVID-19 between March 1 and May 29, 2020. The primary outcome measure was in-hospital mortality. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the association between preadmission cardiometabolic therapy and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Of the 2 763 patients ≥80 years old hospitalized due to COVID-19, 790 (28.6%) had T2DM. Of these patients, 385 (48.7%) died during admission. On the multivariate analysis, the use of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.502, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.309-0.815, p = .005) and angiotensin receptor blockers (AOR 0.454, 95% CI: 0.274-0.759, p = .003) were independent protectors against in-hospital mortality, whereas the use of acetylsalicylic acid was associated with higher in-hospital mortality (AOR 1.761, 95% CI: 1.092-2.842, p = .020). Other antidiabetic drugs, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and statins showed neutral association with in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: We found important differences between cardiometabolic drugs and in-hospital mortality in older patients with T2DM hospitalized for COVID-19. Preadmission treatment with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers could reduce in-hospital mortality; other antidiabetic drugs, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and statins seem to have a neutral effect; and acetylsalicylic acid could be associated with excess mortality.

Impact of Arterial Stiffness on All-Cause Mortality in Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19 in Spain.

Older age and cardiovascular comorbidities are well-known risk factors for all-cause mortality in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Hypertension and age are the 2 principal determinants of arterial stiffness (AS). This study aimed to estimate AS in patients with COVID-19 requiring hospitalization and analyze its association with all-cause in-hospital mortality. This observational, retrospective, multicenter cohort study analyzed 12 170 patients admitted to 150 Spanish centers included in the SEMI-COVID-19 Network. We compared AS, defined as pulse pressure ≥60 mm Hg, and clinical characteristics between survivors and nonsurvivors. Mean age was 67.5 (±16.1) years and 42.5% were women. Overall, 2606 (21.4%) subjects died. Admission systolic blood pressure (BP) <120 and ≥140 mm Hg was a predictor of higher all-cause mortality (23.5% and 22.8%, respectively, P<0.001), compared with systolic BP between 120 and 140 mm Hg (18.6%). The 4379 patients with AS (36.0%) were older and had higher systolic and lower diastolic BP. Multivariate analysis showed that AS and systolic BP <120 mm Hg significantly and independently predicted all-cause in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio [ORadj]: 1.27, P=0.0001; ORadj: 1.48, P=0.0001, respectively) after adjusting for sex (males, ORadj: 1.6, P=0.0001), age tertiles (second and third tertiles, ORadj: 2.0 and 4.7, P=0.0001), Charlson Comorbidity Index (second and third tertiles, ORadj: 4.8 and 8.6, P=0.0001), heart failure, and previous and in-hospital antihypertensive treatment. Our data show that AS and admission systolic BP <120 mm Hg had independent prognostic value for all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19 requiring hospitalization.

Complicaciones de las endoprótesis metálicas autoexpandibles en la obstrucción maligna esofágicay gastroduodenal. Estudio de seis casos / Complications of digestive stents in malignant esophageal and gastrointestinal obstruction. A study of six cases

El manejo de la obstrucción maligna del tracto digestivo alto continúa siendo un gran reto en la actualidad. En el momento del diagnóstico la mayoría de los pacientes presentan un deterioro clínico avanzado debido al tumor y no son buenos candidatos para procedimientos quirúrgicos mayores. En los últimos años las prótesis metálicas autoexpandibles han emergido como una alternativa eficaz, segura y menos invasiva para el tratamiento de la obstrucción maligna esofágica y gastroduodenal. Se describen tasas de éxito del 85-90%, y la mayoría de los pacientes toleran la dieta oral a las 24-36 horas de la colocación del stent. Las complicaciones mayores como la perforación son prácticamente inexistentes, pero otras como la estenosis, la migración o el acodamiento de la prótesis a veces plantean un verdadero problema terapéutico en pacientes cuyo estado general limita con frecuencia poder llevar a cabo otro tipo de medidas. Recogemos una serie de casos de pacientes con diagnóstico neoplásico de origen esofágico o gástrico tratados mediante endoprótesis digestivas, que desarrollaron complicaciones derivadas de las mismas a lo largo de la evolución de su enfermedad

Management of malignant obstruction of gastrointestinal tract continues to be a great challenge. Most of patients have advanced tumors at diagnosis and they are not good candidates for major surgical procedures. During the last years, self-expanding stents have shown to be an effective, safe and less invasive option for the treatment of malignant esophageal and gastroduodenal obstruction. Data confirm the efficacy of the stent in the palliation of malignant esophageal and gastroduodenal obstruction with low complications rates. Success rates of 85-90% are described, and most patients tolerate food 24-36 hours after the procedure. Major complications such as perforation are rare, but others such as stenosis or migration of the stent sometimes become a real therapeutic challenge in patients whose performance status is poor. We present cases of patients with diagnosis of esophageal or gastric neoplasms treated with stents, who developed complications

Mejoría clínica e inmunológica de miastenia grave tras tratamiento con denosumab / Clinical and immunological improvement of myasthenia gravis following treatment with denosumab

No disponible