Assessing the real-world effectiveness of five SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in a cohort of Mexican pensioners: a nationwide nested test-negative design study.

Background: Despite the extensive distribution of COVID-19 vaccines across Latin America, research on their real-world performance remains limited. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of five vaccines (BNT162b2, AZD1222, CoronaVac, Gam-COVID-Vac, and Ad5-nCoV) in a cohort of 2,559,792 pensioners covered by the Mexican Institute of Social Security. Methods: We conducted a nested test-negative design study on 28,271 individuals tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection between April and November 2021, accounting for 29,226 separate episodes. We used mixed-effects logistic regression models to estimate the vaccine effectiveness (VE) in fully vaccinated individuals for symptomatic infection, hospitalization, severe disease, and death. Findings: The median age of the study population was 70 years (interquartile range 65-76) and 76.4% (21,598/28,271) were male. VE rates were 56.3%, 75.3%, 79.7%, and 79.8% against symptomatic infection (95% confidence interval [CI]: 53.5-59.0), hospitalization (95% CI: 73.4-77.0), severe disease (95% CI: 78.0-81.3), and death (95% CI: 78.1-81.4), respectively. When evaluating vaccines individually, all showed moderate to high VE, with the best being BNT162b2 (symptomatic infection, 69.8%, 95% CI: 67.3-72.0; hospitalization, 84.1%, 95% CI: 82.5-85.6; severe disease, 88.2%, 95% CI: 86.7-89.5; and death, 88.3%, 95% CI: 86.9-89.6) and Gam-COVID-Vac (symptomatic infection, 70.0%, 95% CI: 64.8-74.4; hospitalization, 86.8%, 95% CI: 83.7-89.3; severe disease, 91.9%, 95% CI: 89.4-93.9; and death, 92.0%, 95% CI: 89.5-93.9). Interpretation: All five SARS-CoV-2 vaccines available for this population showed moderate to high levels of protection against COVID-19 and its progression to severe outcomes. Funding: Fundación IMSS, México.

Bacterial incidence and drug resistance from pathogens recovered from blood, cerebrospinal and pleural fluids in 2019-2020. Results of the Invifar network.

Background: Antimicrobial resistance is a global concern. Analysis of sterile fluids is essential because microorganisms are defined as significant in most cases. Blood, cerebrospinal, and pleural fluids are frequently received in the microbiology lab because they are associated with considerable rates of morbi-mortality. Knowledge of epidemiology in these samples is needed to choose proper empirical treatments due to the importance of reducing selection pressure. Methods: We used retrospective laboratory data of blood, CSF, and pleural fluid collected from patients in Mexico between 2019 and 2020. Each laboratory identified the strains and tested susceptibility using its routine methods. For Streptococcus pneumoniae, a comparative analysis was performed with data from the broth microdilution method. Results: Forty-five centers participated in the study, with 30,746 clinical isolates from blood, 2,429 from pleural fluid, and 2,275 from CSF. For blood and CSF, Staphylococcus epidermidis was the most frequent. For blood, among gram negatives, the most frequent was Escherichia coli. Among Enterobacterales, 9.8% of K. pneumoniae were carbapenem-resistant. For S. pneumoniae, similar resistance percentages were observed for levofloxacin, cefotaxime, and vancomycin. For CSF, the most frequent gram-negative was E. coli. In Acinetobacter baumannii, carbapenem resistance was 71.4%. The most frequent species detected for pleural fluid was E. coli; in A. baumannii, carbapenem resistance was 96.3%. Conclusion: Gram-negative bacteria, with E. coli most prevalent, are frequently recovered from CSF, blood, and pleural fluid. In S. pneumoniae, the routine, conventional methods showed good agreement in detecting resistance percentages for erythromycin, levofloxacin, and vancomycin.

Assessing the Diagnostic Performance of New Commercial Interferon-γ Release Assays for Mycobacterium tuberculosis Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: We compared 6 new interferon-γ release assays (IGRAs; hereafter index tests: QFT-Plus, QFT-Plus CLIA, QIAreach, Wantai TB-IGRA, Standard E TB-Feron, and T-SPOT.TB/T-Cell Select) with World Health Organization (WHO)-endorsed tests for tuberculosis infection (hereafter reference tests). METHODS: Data sources (1 January 2007-18 August 2021) were Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and manufacturers' data. Cross-sectional and cohort studies comparing the diagnostic performance of index and reference tests were selected. The primary outcomes of interest were the pooled differences in sensitivity and specificity between index and reference tests. The certainty of evidence (CoE) was summarized using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: Eighty-seven studies were included (44 evaluated the QFT-Plus, 4 QFT-Plus CLIA, 3 QIAreach, 26 TB-IGRA, 10 TB-Feron [1 assessing the QFT-Plus], and 1 T-SPOT.TB/T-Cell Select). Compared to the QFT-GIT, QFT Plus's sensitivity was 0.1 percentage points lower (95% confidence interval [CI], -2.8 to 2.6; CoE: moderate), and its specificity 0.9 percentage points lower (95% CI, -1.0 to -.9; CoE: moderate). Compared to QFT-GIT, TB-IGRA's sensitivity was 3.0 percentage points higher (95% CI, -.2 to 6.2; CoE: very low), and its specificity 2.6 percentage points lower (95% CI, -4.2 to -1.0; CoE: low). Agreement between the QFT-Plus CLIA and QIAreach with QFT-Plus was excellent (pooled κ statistics of 0.86 [95% CI, .78 to .94; CoE: low]; and 0.96 [95% CI, .92 to 1.00; CoE: low], respectively). The pooled κ statistic comparing the TB-Feron and the QFT-Plus or QFT-GIT was 0.85 (95% CI, .79 to .92; CoE: low). CONCLUSIONS: The QFT-Plus and the TB-IGRA have very similar sensitivity and specificity as WHO-approved IGRAs.

Testing and Treating Mycobacterium tuberculosis Infection.

After infection with Mycobacterium tuberculosis, a minority of individuals will progress to tuberculosis disease (TB). The risk is higher among persons with well-established risk factors and within the first year after infection. Testing and treating individuals at high risk of progression maximizes the benefits of TB preventive therapy; avoiding testing of low-risk persons will limit potential harms. Several treatment options are available; rifamycin-based regimens offer the best efficacy-safety balance. In this review, we present an overview of the diagnosis and treatment of TB infection, and summarize common clinical scenarios.

Correction: In-hospital mortality from severe COVID-19 in a tertiary care center in Mexico City; causes of death, risk factors and the impact of hospital saturation.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0245772.].

Risk Factors Associated with Failure of Linezolid Therapy in Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcus faecium Bacteremia: A Retrospective Cohort Study in a Referral Center in Mexico.

We aimed to assess the factors associated with 30-day mortality in patients with vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium (VREf) bloodstream infection (BSI) who received treatment with linezolid in an 11-year retrospective cohort of patients with VREf BSI. A univariate and stepwise multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to determine 30-day mortality factors. Moreover, a Cox proportional hazards analysis of predictor covariates of mortality was performed. Eighty patients were included in the final analysis; 42 (53%) died and 38 (47%) survived 30 days after the index bacteremia. Thirteen patients of 42 (31%) died in the first 7 days. The Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score was significantly associated with 30-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.46; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.22-1.76; p < 0.001) in the multivariate analysis. Moreover, VREf BSI persisting for more than 48 hours was a strong factor related to 30-day mortality (aOR, 19.6; 95% CI: 1.46-263; p = 0.01). Adequate control of infection source showed a trend to be protective without reaching significance in the multivariate analysis (aOR, 0.19; 95% CI: 0.04-1.0; p = 0.05). The Cox proportional hazards analysis confirmed the same significant mortality predictor besides linezolid treatment within the first 48 hours as a protective factor (hazard ratio 0.46; 95% CI: 0.23-0.92, p = 0.02). Severely ill patients with high APACHE II score and persistent bacteremia have a higher risk of failure with linezolid therapy.

NAFLD determined by Dallas Steatosis Index is associated with poor outcomes in COVID-19 pneumonia: a cohort study.

Coronavirus disease 2019 is a worldwide health challenge. Liver steatosis diagnosis based on imaging studies has been implicated in poor outcomes of COVID-19 pneumonia, but results are inconsistent. The Dallas Steatosis Index (DSI) is an available calculator developed to identify patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). We hypothesized that it would be associated with in-hospital mortality, intensive care unit admission (ICU), and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). We conducted a retrospective cohort study on inpatients with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia between February 26 and April 11, 2020. We computed the DSI on admission, and patients with high DSI were considered with NAFLD. We employed logistic regression to study the association between NAFLD, mortality, ICU admission, and IMV. We studied the association between liver steatosis on computed tomography (CT) and these outcomes, and also between Metabolic Associated Fatty Liver Disease (MAFLD) based on CT findings and risk factors and the outcomes. 470 patients were included; 359 had NAFLD according to the DSI. They had a higher frequency of type 2 diabetes (31% vs 14%, p < 0.001), obesity (58% vs 14%, p < 0.001), and arterial hypertension (34% vs 22%, p = 0.02). In univariable analysis, NAFLD was associated with mortality, ICU admission, and IMV. Liver steatosis by CT and MAFLD were not associated with any of these outcomes. In multivariable logistic regression, high DSI remained significantly associated with IMV and death. High DSI, which can be easily computed on admission, was associated with IMV and death, and its use to better stratify the prognosis of these patients should be explored. On the other hand, liver steatosis by CT and MAFLD were not associated with poor outcomes.

Effect of Tocilizumab in Mortality among Patients with Severe and Critical Covid-19: Experience in a Third-Level Medical Center.

BACKGROUND: Trials evaluating safety and efficacy of tocilizumab in coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) show contradictory results. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to evaluate the effect of tocilizumab in hospital mortality among patients with severe COVID-19 in a third-level medical center. METHODS: This prospective cohort study included patients with severe and critical COVID-19. Primary outcome was death during hospitalization. Secondary outcomes included invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), days on IMV, ventilator-free days (VFDs), length of hospital stay (LOS), and development of hospitalacquired infections (HAIs). Bivariate, multivariate, and propensity score matching analysis were performed. RESULTS: During the study period, 99/794 (12%) patients received tocilizumab. Male patients, health care workers, and patients with increased inflammatory markers received tocilizumab more frequently. No difference in hospital mortality was observed between groups (34% vs. 34%, p = 0.98). Tocilizumab was not independently associated with mortality. No significant treatment effects were observed in propensity score analysis. IMV was more frequent (46% vs. 11%, p < 0.01) and LOS was longer (12 vs. 7 days, p < 0.01) in the tocilizumab group, reflecting increased severity. Although HAIs were more frequent in the tocilizumab group (22% vs. 10%, p < 0.01), no difference was seen after adjusting for IMV (38% vs. 40%, p = 0.86). CONCLUSIONS: In our study, tocilizumab was not associated with decreased hospital mortality among patients with severe COVID-19.

Large-scale screening for severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) among healthcare workers: Prevalence and risk factors for asymptomatic and pauci-symptomatic carriers, with emphasis on the use of personal protective equipment (PPE).

Healthcare workers (HCWs) not fulfilling the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) case definition underwent severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) screening. Risk of exposure, adherence to personal protective equipment (PPE), and symptoms were assessed. In total, 2,000 HCWs were screened: 5.5% were positive for SARS-CoV-2 by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). There were no differences in PPE use between SARS-CoV-2-positive and -negative HCWs (adherence, >90%). Nursing and kitchen staff were independently associated with positive SARS-CoV-2 results.

Outcomes of patients with severe and critical COVID-19 treated with dexamethasone: a prospective cohort study.

Dexamethasone implementation for COVID-19 management represented a milestone but data regarding its impact and safety have not been consistently reproduced. We aimed to evaluate in-hospital mortality before and after the implementation of corticosteroid treatment (CS-T) for severe and critical COVID-19. We conducted a cohort study that included patients admitted with severe and critical COVID-19. The primary outcome was death during hospitalization. Secondary outcomes included the length of stay (LOS), need for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), time to IMV initiation, IMV duration, and development of hospital-acquired infections (HAIs). Bivariate, multivariate, and propensity-score matching analysis were performed. Among 1540 patients, 688 (45%) received CS-T. Death was less frequent in the CS-T group (18 vs 31%, p < .01). Among patients on IMV, death was also less frequent in the CS-T group (25 vs 55%, p < .01). The median time to IMV was longer in the CS-T group (5 vs 3 days, p < .01). HAIs occurred more frequently in the CS-T group (20 vs 10%, p < .01). LOS, IMV, and IMV duration were similar between groups. Multivariate analysis revealed an independent association between CS-T and lower mortality (aOR 0.26, 95% CI 0.19-0.36, p < .001). Propensity-score matching analysis revealed that CS-T was independently associated with lower mortality (aOR 0.33, 95% CI 0.22-0.50, p < .01). Treatment with corticosteroids was associated with reduced in-hospital mortality among patients with severe and critical COVID-19, including those on IMV.

Increment Antimicrobial Resistance During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Results from the Invifar Network.

Aim: This study aims to assess the changes in antimicrobial resistance among some critical and high-priority microorganisms collected previously and during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in Mexico. Methods: We collected antimicrobial susceptibility data for critical and high-priority microorganisms from blood, urine, respiratory samples, and from all specimens, in which the pathogen may be considered a causative agent. Data were stratified and compared for two periods: 2019 versus 2020 and second semester 2019 (prepandemic) versus the second semester 2020 (pandemic). Results: In the analysis of second semester 2019 versus the second semester 2020, in blood samples, increased resistance to oxacillin (15.2% vs. 36.9%), erythromycin (25.7% vs. 42.8%), and clindamycin (24.8% vs. 43.3%) (p ≤ 0.01) was detected for Staphylococcus aureus, to imipenem (13% vs. 23.4%) and meropenem (11.2% vs. 21.4) (p ≤ 0.01), for Klebsiella pneumoniae. In all specimens, increased ampicillin and tetracycline resistance was detected for Enterococcus faecium (p ≤ 0.01). In cefepime, meropenem, levofloxacin, and gentamicin (p ≤ 0.01), resistance was detected for Escherichia coli; and in piperacillin-tazobactam, cefepime, imipenem, meropenem, ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, and gentamicin (p ≤ 0.01), resistance was detected for Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Conclusion: Antimicrobial resistance increased in Mexico during the COVID-19 pandemic. The increase in oxacillin resistance for S. aureus and carbapenem resistance for K. pneumoniae recovered from blood specimens deserves special attention. In addition, an increase in erythromycin resistance in S. aureus was detected, which may be associated with high azithromycin use. In general, for Acinetobacter baumannii and P. aeruginosa, increasing resistance rates were detected.

Point Prevalence Survey of Antimicrobial Use in Four Tertiary Care Hospitals in Mexico.

PURPOSE: To describe the antimicrobial use in four tertiary care hospitals in Mexico. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Point prevalence surveys (PPSs) were conducted on medical records of hospitalized patients with prescribed antimicrobials (AMs) in four tertiary care hospitals in Mexico in 2019. Prevalence estimates and descriptive statistics were used to present the collected data on antimicrobial prescribing and microbiological studies. RESULTS: The prevalence of patients with prescribed AMs among the hospitals ranged from 47.1% to 91.3%. Antibiotics for systemic use (J01s) were the most prescribed (84.6%, [95% CI: 81.5-87.3]), mainly extended-spectrum J01s: third-generation cephalosporins 19.8% [95% CI: 16.8-23.1], and carbapenems 17.0% [95% CI: 14.2-20.2]. Antibiotic treatments were largely empirical, with no planned duration or review dates. The ceftriaxone use was excessive and prolonged. No formal reference guidelines for antimicrobial prescribing were available in the hospitals. Multidrug-resistant Escherichia coli and ESKAPE pathogens were identified in all hospitals. CONCLUSION: This study describes the extensive use of antimicrobials and broad-spectrum antibiotics for systemic use in Mexican hospitals, along with the presence of resistant pathogens to the antibiotics frequently used in the hospitals surveyed.

Tuberculosis preventive therapy for people living with HIV: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Tuberculosis (TB) preventive therapy (TPT) is an essential component of care for people living with HIV (PLHIV). We compared efficacy, safety, completion, and drug-resistant TB risk for currently recommended TPT regimens through a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized trials. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from inception through June 9, 2020 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing 2 or more TPT regimens (or placebo/no treatment) in PLHIV. Two independent reviewers evaluated eligibility, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. We grouped TPT strategies as follows: placebo/no treatment, 6 to 12 months of isoniazid, 24 to 72 months of isoniazid, and rifamycin-containing regimens. A frequentist NMA (using graph theory) was carried out for the outcomes of development of TB disease, all-cause mortality, and grade 3 or worse hepatotoxicity. For other outcomes, graphical descriptions or traditional pairwise meta-analyses were carried out as appropriate. The potential role of confounding variables for TB disease and all-cause mortality was assessed through stratified analyses. A total of 6,466 unique studies were screened, and 157 full texts were assessed for eligibility. Of these, 20 studies (reporting 16 randomized trials) were included. The median sample size was 616 (interquartile range [IQR], 317 to 1,892). Eight were conducted in Africa, 3 in Europe, 3 in the Americas, and 2 included sites in multiple continents. According to the NMA, 6 to 12 months of isoniazid were no more efficacious in preventing microbiologically confirmed TB than rifamycin-containing regimens (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1.0, 95% CI 0.8 to 1.4, p = 0.8); however, 6 to 12 months of isoniazid were associated with a higher incidence of all-cause mortality (IRR 1.6, 95% CI 1.2 to 2.0, p = 0.02) and a higher risk of grade 3 or higher hepatotoxicity (risk difference [RD] 8.9, 95% CI 2.8 to 14.9, p = 0.004). Finally, shorter regimens were associated with higher completion rates relative to longer regimens, and we did not find statistically significant differences in the risk of drug-resistant TB between regimens. Study limitations include potential confounding due to differences in posttreatment follow-up time and TB incidence in the study setting on the estimates of incidence of TB or all-cause mortality, as well as an underrepresentation of pregnant women and children. CONCLUSIONS: Rifamycin-containing regimens appear safer and at least as effective as isoniazid regimens in preventing TB and death and should be considered part of routine care in PLHIV. Knowledge gaps remain as to which specific rifamycin-containing regimen provides the optimal balance of efficacy, completion, and safety.

Adverse Effects Associated With the Use of Antimalarials During The COVID-19 Pandemic in a Tertiary Care Center in Mexico City.

Background: Antimalarial drugs were widely used as experimental therapies against COVID-19 in the initial stages of the pandemic. Despite multiple randomized controlled trials demonstrating unfavorable outcomes in both efficacy and adverse effects, antimalarial drugs are still prescribed in developing countries, especially in those experiencing recurrent COVID-19 crises (India and Brazil). Therefore, real-life experience and pharmacovigilance studies describing the use and side effects of antimalarials for COVID-19 in developing countries are still relevant. Objective: To describe the adverse effects associated with the use of antimalarial drugs in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 pneumonia at a reference center in Mexico City. Methods: We integrated a retrospective cohort with all adult patients hospitalized for COVID-19 pneumonia from March 13th, 2020, to May 17th, 2020. We compared the baseline characteristics (demographic and clinical) and the adverse effects between the groups of patients treated with and without antimalarial drugs. The mortality analysis was performed in 491 patients who received optimal care and were not transferred to other institutions (210 from the antimalarial group and 281 from the other group). Results: We included 626 patients from whom 38% (n = 235) received an antimalarial drug. The mean age was 51.2 ± 13.6 years, and 64% were males. At baseline, compared with the group treated with antimalarials, the group that did not receive antimalarials had more dyspnea (82 vs. 73%, p = 0.017) and cyanosis (5.3 vs. 0.9%, p = 0.009), higher respiratory rate (median of 28 vs. 24 bpm, p < 0.001), and lower oxygen saturation (median of 83 vs. 87%, p < 0.001). In the group treated with antimalarials, 120 patients had two EKG evaluations, from whom 12% (n = 16) prolonged their QTc from baseline in more than 50 ms, and six developed a ventricular arrhythmia. Regarding the trajectories of the liver function tests over time, no significant differences were found for the change in the mean value per day between the two groups. Among patients who received optimal care, the mortality was 16% (33/210) in those treated with antimalarials and 15% (41/281) in those not receiving antimalarials (RR 1.08, 95% 0.75-1.64, and adjusted RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.69-1.82). Conclusion: The adverse events in patients with COVID-19 treated with antimalarials were similar to those who did not receive antimalarials at institutions with rigorous pharmacological surveillance. However, they do not improve survival in patients who receive optimal medical care.

Adaptive Metabolic and Inflammatory Responses Identified Using Accelerated Aging Metrics Are Linked to Adverse Outcomes in Severe SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

BACKGROUND: Chronological age (CA) is a predictor of adverse coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes; however, CA alone does not capture individual responses to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Here, we evaluated the influence of aging metrics PhenoAge and PhenoAgeAccel to predict adverse COVID-19 outcomes. Furthermore, we sought to model adaptive metabolic and inflammatory responses to severe SARS-CoV-2 infection using individual PhenoAge components. METHOD: In this retrospective cohort study, we assessed cases admitted to a COVID-19 reference center in Mexico City. PhenoAge and PhenoAgeAccel were estimated using laboratory values at admission. Cox proportional hazards models were fitted to estimate risk for COVID-19 lethality and adverse outcomes (intensive care unit admission, intubation, or death). To explore reproducible patterns which model adaptive responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection, we used k-means clustering using PhenoAge components. RESULTS: We included 1068 subjects of whom 222 presented critical illness and 218 died. PhenoAge was a better predictor of adverse outcomes and lethality compared to CA and SpO2 and its predictive capacity was sustained for all age groups. Patients with responses associated to PhenoAgeAccel >0 had higher risk of death and critical illness compared to those with lower values (log-rank p < .001). Using unsupervised clustering, we identified 4 adaptive responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection: (i) inflammaging associated with CA, (ii) metabolic dysfunction associated with cardiometabolic comorbidities, (iii) unfavorable hematological response, and (iv) response associated with favorable outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Adaptive responses related to accelerated aging metrics are linked to adverse COVID-19 outcomes and have unique and distinguishable features. PhenoAge is a better predictor of adverse outcomes compared to CA.

Antimicrobial Resistance Patterns and Antibiotic Use during Hospital Conversion in the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To describe empirical antimicrobial prescription on admission in patients with severe COVID-19, the prevalence of Hospital-Acquired Infections, and the susceptibility patterns of the causing organisms. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study in a tertiary care center in Mexico City, we included consecutive patients admitted with severe COVID-19 between March 20th and June 10th and evaluated empirical antimicrobial prescription and the occurrence of HAI. RESULTS: 794 patients with severe COVID-19 were admitted during the study period. Empiric antibiotic treatment was started in 92% of patients (731/794); the most frequent regimes were amoxicillin-clavulanate plus atypical coverage in 341 (46.6%) and ceftriaxone plus atypical coverage in 213 (29.1%). We identified 110 HAI episodes in 74/656 patients (11.3%). Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) was the most frequent HAI, in 56/110 (50.9%), followed by bloodstream infections (BSI), in 32/110 (29.1%). The most frequent cause of VAP were Enterobacteriaceae in 48/69 (69.6%), followed by non-fermenter gram-negative bacilli in 18/69 (26.1%). The most frequent cause of BSI was coagulase negative staphylococci, in 14/35 (40.0%), followed by Enterobacter complex in 7/35 (20%). Death occurred in 30/74 (40.5%) patients with one or more HAI episodes and in 193/584 (33.0%) patients without any HAI episode (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: A high frequency of empiric antibiotic treatment in patients admitted with COVID-19 was seen. VAP and BSI were the most frequent hospital-acquired infections, due to Enterobacteriaceae and coagulase negative staphylococci, respectively.

In-hospital mortality from severe COVID-19 in a tertiary care center in Mexico City; causes of death, risk factors and the impact of hospital saturation.

BACKGROUND: As the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has remained in Latin America, Mexico has become the third country with the highest death rate worldwide. Data regarding in-hospital mortality and its risk factors, as well as the impact of hospital overcrowding in Latin America has not been thoroughly explored. METHODS AND FINDINGS: In this prospective cohort study, we enrolled consecutive adult patients hospitalized with severe confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia at a SARS-CoV-2 referral center in Mexico City from February 26th, 2020, to June 5th, 2020. A total of 800 patients were admitted with confirmed diagnosis, mean age was 51.9 ± 13.9 years, 61% were males, 85% were either obese or overweight, 30% had hypertension and 26% type 2 diabetes. From those 800, 559 recovered (69.9%) and 241 died (30.1%). Among survivors, 101 (18%) received invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and 458 (82%) were managed outside the intensive care unit (ICU); mortality in the ICU was 49%. From the non-survivors, 45.6% (n = 110) did not receive full support due to lack of ICU bed availability. Within this subgroup the main cause of death was acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in 95% of the cases, whereas among the non-survivors who received full (n = 105) support the main cause of death was septic shock (45%) followed by ARDS (29%). The main risk factors associated with in-hospital death were male sex (RR 2.05, 95% CI 1.34-3.12), obesity (RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.14-2.32)-in particular morbid obesity (RR 3.38, 95%CI 1.63-7.00)-and oxygen saturation < 80% on admission (RR 4.8, 95%CI 3.26-7.31). CONCLUSIONS: In this study we found similar in-hospital and ICU mortality, as well as risk factors for mortality, compared to previous reports. However, 45% of the patients who did not survive justified admission to ICU but did not receive IMV / ICU care due to the unavailability of ICU beds. Furthermore, mortality rate over time was mainly due to the availability of ICU beds, indirectly suggesting that overcrowding was one of the main factors that contributed to hospital mortality.