Prognostic Value of D-dimer to Lymphocyte Ratio (DLR) in Hospitalized Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Patients: A Validation Study in a National Cohort.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to validate the role of the D-dimer to lymphocyte ratio (DLR) for mortality prediction in a large national cohort of hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. METHODS: A retrospective, multicenter, observational study that included hospitalized patients due to SARS-CoV-2 infection in Spain was conducted from March 2020 to March 2022. All biomarkers and laboratory indices analyzed were measured once at admission. RESULTS: A total of 10,575 COVID-19 patients were included in this study. The mean age of participants was 66.9 (±16) years, and 58.6% (6202 patients) of them were male. The overall mortality rate was 16.3% (n = 1726 patients). Intensive care unit admission was needed in 10.5% (n = 1106 patients), non-invasive mechanical ventilation was required in 8.8% (n = 923 patients), and orotracheal intubation was required in 7.5% (789 patients). DLR presented a c-statistic of 0.69 (95% CI, 0.68-0.71) for in-hospital mortality with an optimal cut-off above 1. Multivariate analysis showed an independent association for in-hospital mortality for DLR > 1 (adjusted OR 2.09, 95% CI 1.09-4.04; p = 0.03); in the same way, survival analysis showed a higher mortality risk for DLR > 1 (HR 2.24; 95% CI 2.03-2.47; p < 0.01). Further, no other laboratory indices showed an independent association for mortality in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirmed the usefulness of DLR as a prognostic biomarker for mortality associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection, being an accessible, cost-effective, and easy-to-use biomarker in daily clinical practice.

Prognostic Factors Associated with Acute Heart Failure in Patients Admitted for COVID-19: Analysis of the SEMI-COVID-19 Registry.

INTRODUCTION: Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020, an intimate relationship between this disease and cardiovascular diseases has been seen. However, few studies assess the development of heart failure during this infection. This study aims to determine the predisposing factors for the development of heart failure (HF) during hospital admission of COVID-19 patients. METHODOLOGY: A retrospective and multicenter study of patients with HF admitted for COVID-19 in 150 Spanish hospitals (SEMI-COVID-19 Registry). A bivariate analysis was performed to relate the different variables evaluated in patients developing heart failure during hospital admission. A multivariate analysis including the most relevant clinical variables obtained in bivariate analyses to predict the outcome of heart failure was performed. RESULTS: A total of 16.474 patients hospitalized for COVID-19 were included (57.5% men, mean age 67 years), 958 of them (5.8%) developed HF during hospitalization. The risk factors for HF development were: age (odds ratio [OR]): 1.042; confidence interval 95% (CI 95%): 1.035-1.050; p < 0.001), atrial fibrillation (OR: 2.022; CI 95%: 1.697-2.410; p < 0.001), BMI > 30 kg/m2 (OR: 1.460 CI 95%: 1.230-1.733; p < 0001), and peripheral vascular disease (OR: 1.564; CI 95%: 1.217-2.201; p < 0.001). Patients who developed HF had a higher rate of mortality (54.1% vs. 19.1%, p < 0.001), intubation rate (OR: 2,36; p < 0.001), and ICU admissions (OR: 2.38; p < 0001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who presented a higher risk of developing HF were older with cardiovascular risk factors. The risk factors for HF development were age, atrial fibrillation, obesity, and peripheral vascular disease. In addition, patients who developed HF more frequently required to be intubated or admitted to the ICU.

Impacto de un cribado oportunista de hipercolesterolemia familiar (estudio CRIBACOL) en el area sanitaria de Vigo / Impact of an Opportunist Screening for Family Hypercholesterolemia (CRIBACOL study) in the sanitary area of Vigo

Objective: To assess the effectiveness of the diagnosis of Familial Hypercholesterolemia (FH) through opportunistic screening in the health area of Vigo. Material and Methods: An opportunistic screening was carried out retrospectively on all patients in the Vigo Health Area who had been requested to determine their LDLc during 2018. The inclusion criterion was LDL>250 mg/dL, and the exclusion criteria (TSH >4 mIU/L, A1C>6.5%, fasting glucose>126 mg/dL, Triglycerides>150 mg/dL, GGT>55 IU/L and/or alkaline phosphatase>135 IU/L, proteinuria>3g/ L and serum albumin <30g/L). Opportunistic screening was performed using the Modulab Gold (IZASA) program. Results: The total number of LDL determinations was 236,528 out of 185,095 patients. 233 patients met the inclusion criteria. 162 were discarded due to the exclusion criteria. 71 patients with a possible diagnosis of HF were obtained. These patients underwent a clinical interview applying the criteria of the Dutch Lipid Clinics Network (DLCN). The results were: men (21.12%) and women (78.87%); the mean age was 58 years; had hypertension (22.53%), diabetes (1.4%), smoker (23.49%), received statins (63.38%). The results of applying the DLCN criteria were diagnosis possible (53.52%), probable (32.39%) and certain (14.08%). Conclusion: HF is an underdiagnosed and undertreated disease. The application of an opportunistic screening method with an alarm system for health professionals who request lipid profiles can make an early diagnosis of this disease with high cardiovascular risk. (AU)

C-Reactive Protein and Serum Albumin Ratio: A Feasible Prognostic Marker in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19.

(1) Background: C-reactive protein (CRP) and albumin are inflammatory markers. We analyzed the prognostic capacity of serum albumin (SA) and CRP for an outcome comprising mortality, length of stay, ICU admission, and non-invasive mechanical ventilation in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. (2) Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study based on the Spanish national SEMI-COVID-19 Registry. Two multivariate logistic models were adjusted for SA, CRP, and their combination. Training and testing samples were used to validate the models. (3) Results: The outcome was present in 41.1% of the 3471 participants, who had lower SA (mean [SD], 3.5 [0.6] g/dL vs. 3.8 [0.5] g/dL; p < 0.001) and higher CRP (108.9 [96.5] mg/L vs. 70.6 [70.3] mg/L; p < 0.001). In the adjusted multivariate model, both were associated with poorer evolution: SA, OR 0.674 (95% CI, 0.551−0.826; p < 0.001); CRP, OR 1.002 (95% CI, 1.001−1.004; p = 0.003). The CRP/SA model had a similar predictive capacity (honest AUC, 0.8135 [0.7865−0.8405]), with a continuously increasing risk and cutoff value of 25 showing the highest predictive capacity (OR, 1.470; 95% CI, 1.188−1.819; p < 0.001). (4) Conclusions: SA and CRP are good independent predictors of patients hospitalized with COVID-19. For the CRP/SA ratio value, 25 is the cutoff for poor clinical course.

WHO Ordinal Scale and Inflammation Risk Categories in COVID-19. Comparative Study of the Severity Scales.

BACKGROUND: The WHO ordinal severity scale has been used to predict mortality and guide trials in COVID-19. However, it has its limitations. OBJECTIVE: The present study aims to compare three classificatory and predictive models: the WHO ordinal severity scale, the model based on inflammation grades, and the hybrid model. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study with patient data collected and followed up from March 1, 2020, to May 1, 2021, from the nationwide SEMI-COVID-19 Registry. The primary study outcome was in-hospital mortality. As this was a hospital-based study, the patients included corresponded to categories 3 to 7 of the WHO ordinal scale. Categories 6 and 7 were grouped in the same category. KEY RESULTS: A total of 17,225 patients were included in the study. Patients classified as high risk in each of the WHO categories according to the degree of inflammation were as follows: 63.8% vs. 79.9% vs. 90.2% vs. 95.1% (p<0.001). In-hospital mortality for WHO ordinal scale categories 3 to 6/7 was as follows: 0.8% vs. 24.3% vs. 45.3% vs. 34% (p<0.001). In-hospital mortality for the combined categories of ordinal scale 3a to 5b was as follows: 0.4% vs. 1.1% vs. 11.2% vs. 27.5% vs. 35.5% vs. 41.1% (p<0.001). The predictive regression model for in-hospital mortality with our proposed combined ordinal scale reached an AUC=0.871, superior to the two models separately. CONCLUSIONS: The present study proposes a new severity grading scale for COVID-19 hospitalized patients. In our opinion, it is the most informative, representative, and predictive scale in COVID-19 patients to date.

The importance of association of comorbidities on COVID-19 outcomes: a machine learning approach.

BACKGROUND: The individual influence of a variety of comorbidities on COVID-19 patient outcomes has already been analyzed in previous works in an isolated way. We aim to determine if different associations of diseases influence the outcomes of inpatients with COVID-19. METHODS: Retrospective cohort multicenter study based on clinical practice. Data were taken from the SEMI-COVID-19 Registry, which includes most consecutive patients with confirmed COVID-19 hospitalized and discharged in Spain. Two machine learning algorithms were applied in order to classify comorbidities and patients (Random Forest -RF algorithm, and Gaussian mixed model by clustering -GMM-). The primary endpoint was a composite of either, all-cause death or intensive care unit admission during the period of hospitalization. The sample was randomly divided into training and test sets to determine the most important comorbidities related to the primary endpoint, grow several clusters with these comorbidities based on discriminant analysis and GMM, and compare these clusters. RESULTS: A total of 16,455 inpatients (57.4% women and 42.6% men) were analyzed. According to the RF algorithm, the most important comorbidities were heart failure/atrial fibrillation (HF/AF), vascular diseases, and neurodegenerative diseases. There were six clusters: three included patients who met the primary endpoint (clusters 4, 5, and 6) and three included patients who did not (clusters 1, 2, and 3). Patients with HF/AF, vascular diseases, and neurodegenerative diseases were distributed among clusters 3, 4 and 5. Patients in cluster 5 also had kidney, liver, and acid peptic diseases as well as a chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; it was the cluster with the worst prognosis. CONCLUSION: The interplay of several comorbidities may affect the outcome and complications of inpatients with COVID-19.

Influence of chronic use of corticosteroids and calcineurin inhibitors on COVID-19 clinical outcomes: analysis of a nationwide registry.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to analyze whether subgroups of immunosuppressive (IS) medications conferred different outcomes in COVID-19. METHODS: The study involved a multicenter retrospective cohort of consecutive immunosuppressed patients (ISPs) hospitalized with COVID-19 from March to July, 2020. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. A propensity score-matched (PSM) model comparing ISP and non-ISP was planned, as well as specific PSM models comparing individual IS medications associated with mortality. RESULTS: Out of 16 647 patients, 868 (5.2%) were on chronic IS therapy prior to admission and were considered ISPs. In the PSM model, ISPs had greater in-hospital mortality (OR 1.25, 95% CI 0.99-1.62), which was related to a worse outcome associated with chronic corticoids (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.43-2.49). Other IS drugs had no repercussions with regard to mortality risk (including calcineurin inhibitors (CNI); OR 1.19, 95% CI 0.65-2.20). In the pre-planned specific PSM model involving patients on chronic IS treatment before admission, corticosteroids were associated with an increased risk of mortality (OR 2.34, 95% CI 1.43-3.82). CONCLUSIONS: Chronic IS therapies comprise a heterogeneous group of drugs with different risk profiles for severe COVID-19 and death. Chronic systemic corticosteroid therapy is associated with increased mortality. On the contrary, CNI and other IS treatments prior to admission do not seem to convey different outcomes.

Inadequate use of antibiotics in the covid-19 era: effectiveness of antibiotic therapy.

BACKGROUND: Since December 2019, the COVID-19 pandemic has changed the concept of medicine. This work aims to analyze the use of antibiotics in patients admitted to the hospital due to SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: This work analyzes the use and effectiveness of antibiotics in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 based on data from the SEMI-COVID-19 registry, an initiative to generate knowledge about this disease using data from electronic medical records. Our primary endpoint was all-cause in-hospital mortality according to antibiotic use. The secondary endpoint was the effect of macrolides on mortality. RESULTS: Of 13,932 patients, antibiotics were used in 12,238. The overall death rate was 20.7% and higher among those taking antibiotics (87.8%). Higher mortality was observed with use of all antibiotics (OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.21-1.62; p < .001) except macrolides, which had a higher survival rate (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.64-0.76; p < .001). The decision to start antibiotics was influenced by presence of increased inflammatory markers and any kind of infiltrate on an x-ray. Patients receiving antibiotics required respiratory support and were transferred to intensive care units more often. CONCLUSIONS: Bacterial co-infection was uncommon among COVID-19 patients, yet use of antibiotics was high. There is insufficient evidence to support widespread use of empiric antibiotics in these patients. Most may not require empiric treatment and if they do, there is promising evidence regarding azithromycin as a potential COVID-19 treatment.

Clinical Characteristics and Risk Factors of Respiratory Failure in a Cohort of Young Patients Requiring Hospital Admission with SARS-CoV2 Infection in Spain: Results of the Multicenter SEMI-COVID-19 Registry.

BACKGROUND: Age is a risk factor for COVID severity. Most studies performed in hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV2 infection have shown an over-representation of older patients and consequently few have properly defined COVID-19 in younger patients who require hospital admission. The aim of the present study was to analyze the clinical characteristics and risk factors for the development of respiratory failure among young (18 to 50 years) hospitalized patients with COVID-19. METHODS: This retrospective nationwide cohort study included hospitalized patients from 18 to 50 years old with confirmed COVID-19 between March 1, 2020, and July 2, 2020. All patient data were obtained from the SEMI-COVID Registry. Respiratory failure was defined as the ratio of partial pressure of arterial oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO2/FiO2 ratio) ≤200 mmHg or the need for mechanical ventilation and/or high-flow nasal cannula or the presence of acute respiratory distress syndrome. RESULTS: During the recruitment period, 15,034 patients were included in the SEMI-COVID-19 Registry, of whom 2327 (15.4%) were younger than 50 years. Respiratory failure developed in 343 (14.7%), while mortality occurred in 2.3%. Patients with respiratory failure showed a higher incidence of major adverse cardiac events (44 (13%) vs 14 (0.8%), p<0.001), venous thrombosis (23 (6.7%) vs 14 (0.8%), p<0.001), mortality (43 (12.5%) vs 7 (0.4%), p<0.001), and longer hospital stay (15 (9-24) vs 6 (4-9), p<0.001), than the remaining patients. In multivariate analysis, variables associated with the development of respiratory failure were obesity (odds ratio (OR), 2.42; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 1.71 to 3.43; p<0.0001), alcohol abuse (OR, 2.40; 95% CI, 1.26 to 4.58; p=0.0076), sleep apnea syndrome (SAHS) (OR, 2.22; 95% CI, 1.07 to 3.43; p=0.032), Charlson index ≥1 (OR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.25 to 2.52; p=0.0013), fever (OR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.13 to 2.22; p=0.0075), lymphocytes ≤1100 cells/µL (OR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.18 to 2.37; p=0.0033), LDH >320 U/I (OR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.18 to 2.42; p=0.0039), AST >35 mg/dL (OR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.2 to 2.52; p=0.003), sodium <135 mmol/L (OR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.24 to 4.33; p=0.0079), and C-reactive protein >8 mg/dL (OR, 2.42; 95% CI, 1.72 to 3.41; p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Young patients with COVID-19 requiring hospital admission showed a notable incidence of respiratory failure. Obesity, SAHS, alcohol abuse, and certain laboratory parameters were independently associated with the development of this complication. Patients who suffered respiratory failure had a higher mortality and a higher incidence of major cardiac events, venous thrombosis, and hospital stay.

Predicting critical illness on initial diagnosis of COVID-19 based on easily obtained clinical variables: development and validation of the PRIORITY model.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to develop and validate a prediction model, based on clinical history and examination findings on initial diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), to identify patients at risk of critical outcomes. METHODS: We used data from the SEMI-COVID-19 Registry, a cohort of consecutive patients hospitalized for COVID-19 from 132 centres in Spain (23rd March to 21st May 2020). For the development cohort, tertiary referral hospitals were selected, while the validation cohort included smaller hospitals. The primary outcome was a composite of in-hospital death, mechanical ventilation, or admission to intensive care unit. Clinical signs and symptoms, demographics, and medical history ascertained at presentation were screened using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator, and logistic regression was used to construct the predictive model. RESULTS: There were 10 433 patients, 7850 in the development cohort (primary outcome 25.1%, 1967/7850) and 2583 in the validation cohort (outcome 27.0%, 698/2583). The PRIORITY model included: age, dependency, cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease, dyspnoea, tachypnoea, confusion, systolic blood pressure, and SpO2 ≤93% or oxygen requirement. The model showed high discrimination for critical illness in both the development (C-statistic 0.823; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.813, 0.834) and validation (C-statistic 0.794; 95%CI 0.775, 0.813) cohorts. A freely available web-based calculator was developed based on this model (https://www.evidencio.com/models/show/2344). CONCLUSIONS: The PRIORITY model, based on easily obtained clinical information, had good discrimination and generalizability for identifying COVID-19 patients at risk of critical outcomes.

Inappropriate antibiotic use in the COVID-19 era: Factors associated with inappropriate prescribing and secondary complications. Analysis of the registry SEMI-COVID.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with COVID-19 receive antibiotics despite the fact that bacterial co-infections are rare. This can lead to increased complications, including antibacterial resistance. We aim to analyze risk factors for inappropriate antibiotic prescription in these patients and describe possible complications arising from their use. METHODS: The SEMI-COVID-19 Registry is a multicenter, retrospective patient cohort. Patients with antibiotic were divided into two groups according to appropriate or inappropriate prescription, depending on whether the patient fulfill any criteria for its use. Comparison was made by means of multilevel logistic regression analysis. Possible complications of antibiotic use were also identified. RESULTS: Out of 13,932 patients, 3047 (21.6%) were prescribed no antibiotics, 6116 (43.9%) were appropriately prescribed antibiotics, and 4769 (34.2%) were inappropriately prescribed antibiotics. The following were independent factors of inappropriate prescription: February-March 2020 admission (OR 1.54, 95%CI 1.18-2.00), age (OR 0.98, 95%CI 0.97-0.99), absence of comorbidity (OR 1.43, 95%CI 1.05-1.94), dry cough (OR 2.51, 95%CI 1.94-3.26), fever (OR 1.33, 95%CI 1.13-1.56), dyspnea (OR 1.31, 95%CI 1.04-1.69), flu-like symptoms (OR 2.70, 95%CI 1.75-4.17), and elevated C-reactive protein levels (OR 1.01 for each mg/L increase, 95% CI 1.00-1.01). Adverse drug reactions were more frequent in patients who received ANTIBIOTIC (4.9% vs 2.7%, p < .001). CONCLUSION: The inappropriate use of antibiotics was very frequent in COVID-19 patients and entailed an increased risk of adverse reactions. It is crucial to define criteria for their use in these patients. Knowledge of the factors associated with inappropriate prescribing can be helpful.

Gender-Based Differences by Age Range in Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19: A Spanish Observational Cohort Study.

There is some evidence that male gender could have a negative impact on the prognosis and severity of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. The aim of the present study was to compare the characteristics of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) between hospitalized men and women with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. This multicenter, retrospective, observational study is based on the SEMI-COVID-19 Registry. We analyzed the differences between men and women for a wide variety of demographic, clinical, and treatment variables, and the sex distribution of the reported COVID-19 deaths, as well as intensive care unit (ICU) admission by age subgroups. This work analyzed 12,063 patients (56.8% men). The women in our study were older than the men, on average (67.9 vs. 65.7 years; p < 001). Bilateral condensation was more frequent among men than women (31.8% vs. 29.9%; p = 0.007). The men needed non-invasive and invasive mechanical ventilation more frequently (5.6% vs. 3.6%, p < 0.001, and 7.9% vs. 4.8%, p < 0.001, respectively). The most prevalent complication was acute respiratory distress syndrome, with severe cases in 19.9% of men (p < 0.001). In men, intensive care unit admission was more frequent (10% vs. 6.1%; p < 0.001) and the mortality rate was higher (23.1% vs. 18.9%; p < 0.001). Regarding mortality, the differences by gender were statistically significant in the age groups from 55 years to 89 years of age. A multivariate analysis showed that female sex was significantly and independently associated with a lower risk of mortality in our study. Male sex appears to be related to worse progress in COVID-19 patients and is an independent prognostic factor for mortality. In order to fully understand its prognostic impact, other factors associated with sex must be considered.

Healthcare workers hospitalized due to COVID-19 have no higher risk of death than general population. Data from the Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 Registry.

AIM: To determine whether healthcare workers (HCW) hospitalized in Spain due to COVID-19 have a worse prognosis than non-healthcare workers (NHCW). METHODS: Observational cohort study based on the SEMI-COVID-19 Registry, a nationwide registry that collects sociodemographic, clinical, laboratory, and treatment data on patients hospitalised with COVID-19 in Spain. Patients aged 20-65 years were selected. A multivariate logistic regression model was performed to identify factors associated with mortality. RESULTS: As of 22 May 2020, 4393 patients were included, of whom 419 (9.5%) were HCW. Median (interquartile range) age of HCW was 52 (15) years and 62.4% were women. Prevalence of comorbidities and severe radiological findings upon admission were less frequent in HCW. There were no difference in need of respiratory support and admission to intensive care unit, but occurrence of sepsis and in-hospital mortality was lower in HCW (1.7% vs. 3.9%; p = 0.024 and 0.7% vs. 4.8%; p<0.001 respectively). Age, male sex and comorbidity, were independently associated with higher in-hospital mortality and healthcare working with lower mortality (OR 0.211, 95%CI 0.067-0.667, p = 0.008). 30-days survival was higher in HCW (0.968 vs. 0.851 p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalized COVID-19 HCW had fewer comorbidities and a better prognosis than NHCW. Our results suggest that professional exposure to COVID-19 in HCW does not carry more clinical severity nor mortality.

The Prognostic Value of Eosinophil Recovery in COVID-19: A Multicentre, Retrospective Cohort Study on Patients Hospitalised in Spanish Hospitals.

OBJECTIVES: A decrease in blood cell counts, especially lymphocytes and eosinophils, has been described in patients with serious Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), but there is no knowledge of their potential role of the recovery in these patients' prognosis. This article aims to analyse the effect of blood cell depletion and blood cell recovery on mortality due to COVID-19. DESIGN: This work was a retrospective, multicentre cohort study of 9644 hospitalised patients with confirmed COVID-19 from the Spanish Society of Internal Medicine's SEMI-COVID-19 Registry. SETTING: This study examined patients hospitalised in 147 hospitals throughout Spain. PARTICIPANTS: This work analysed 9644 patients (57.12% male) out of a cohort of 12,826 patients ≥18 years of age hospitalised with COVID-19 in Spain included in the SEMI-COVID-19 Registry as of 29 May 2020. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measure of this work is the effect of blood cell depletion and blood cell recovery on mortality due to COVID-19. Univariate analysis was performed to determine possible predictors of death, and then multivariate analysis was carried out to control for potential confounders. RESULTS: An increase in the eosinophil count on the seventh day of hospitalisation was associated with a better prognosis, including lower mortality rates (5.2% vs. 22.6% in non-recoverers, OR 0.234; 95% CI, 0.154 to 0.354) and lower complication rates, especially regarding the development of acute respiratory distress syndrome (8% vs. 20.1%, p = 0.000) and ICU admission (5.4% vs. 10.8%, p = 0.000). Lymphocyte recovery was found to have no effect on prognosis. Treatment with inhaled or systemic glucocorticoids was not found to be a confounding factor. CONCLUSION: Eosinophil recovery in patients with COVID-19 who required hospitalisation had an independent prognostic value for all-cause mortality and a milder course.

Admission hyperglycaemia as a predictor of mortality in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 regardless of diabetes status: data from the Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 Registry.

BACKGROUND: Hyperglycaemia has emerged as an important risk factor for death in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between blood glucose (BG) levels and in-hospital mortality in non-critically patients hospitalized with COVID-19. METHODS: This is a retrospective multi-centre study involving patients hospitalized in Spain. Patients were categorized into three groups according to admission BG levels: <140 mg/dL, 140-180 mg/dL and >180 mg/dL. The primary endpoint was all-cause in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Of the 11,312 patients, only 2128 (18.9%) had diabetes and 2289 (20.4%) died during hospitalization. The in-hospital mortality rates were 15.7% (<140 mg/dL), 33.7% (140-180 mg) and 41.1% (>180 mg/dL), p<.001. The cumulative probability of mortality was significantly higher in patients with hyperglycaemia compared to patients with normoglycaemia (log rank, p<.001), independently of pre-existing diabetes. Hyperglycaemia (after adjusting for age, diabetes, hypertension and other confounding factors) was an independent risk factor of mortality (BG >180 mg/dL: HR 1.50; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.31-1.73) (BG 140-180 mg/dL; HR 1.48; 95%CI: 1.29-1.70). Hyperglycaemia was also associated with requirement for mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit (ICU) admission and mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Admission hyperglycaemia is a strong predictor of all-cause mortality in non-critically hospitalized COVID-19 patients regardless of prior history of diabetes. KEY MESSAGE Admission hyperglycaemia is a stronger and independent risk factor for mortality in COVID-19. Screening for hyperglycaemia, in patients without diabetes, and early treatment of hyperglycaemia should be mandatory in the management of patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Admission hyperglycaemia should not be overlooked in all patients regardless prior history of diabetes.

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.

Factores clínicos asociados a enfermedad pulmonar por Aspergillus spp. en pacientes con enfermedad pulmonar obstructiva crónica / Clinical factors associated with pulmonary aspergillosis in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

OBJETIVO: Conocer las características clínicas y epidemiológicas de los pacientes con enfermedad pulmonar obstructiva crónica (EPOC) y aislamiento de especies de Aspergillus en muestra respiratoria e identificar factores que nos ayuden a diferenciar entre colonización e infección. MÉTODOS: Estudio de cohortes retrospectivo en el que se incluyeron todos los pacientes con EPOC y aislamiento de Aspergillus spp. en muestra respiratoria durante un periodo de 12 años. Se asignaron los pacientes a 2 categorías: colonización y aspergilosis pulmonar (AP), que incluye las diferentes formas de presentación clínica. Se aplicó un modelo de regresión logística binaria para identificar los factores predictores de desarrollo de AP. RESULTADOS: Un total de 123 pacientes fueron incluidos en el estudio: 48 (39%) colonizados y 75 (61%) con AP: 68 con AP invasiva probable y 7 con AP crónica. No hubo correlación entre el riesgo de AP y los estadios espirométricos de la clasificación GOLD. Se identificaron como factores predictores independientes de AP en pacientes con EPOC la oxigenoterapia domiciliaria (OR: 4,39; IC 95%: 1,60-12,01; p = 0,004), las bronquiectasias (OR: 3,61; IC 95%: 1,40-9,30; p = 0,008), la hospitalización en los 3 meses previos al ingreso (OR: 3,12; IC 95%: 1,24-7,87; p = 0,016) y la terapia antifúngica frente a Candida spp. en el mes previo (OR: 3,18; IC 95%: 1,16-8,73; p = 0,024). CONCLUSIONES: La oxigenoterapia continua domiciliaria, las bronquiectasias, la hospitalización en los 3 meses previos al ingreso y la utilización de terapia antifúngica frente a Candida spp. en el mes previo se asocian a mayor riesgo de AP en pacientes con EPOC

OBJECTIVE: To explore the clinical and epidemiological characteristics of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients with Aspergillus spp. isolation from respiratory samples, and to identify which factors may help us to distinguish between colonisation and infection. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed. All patients with COPD and respiratory isolation of Aspergillus spp. over a 12-year period were included. Patients were assigned to 2 categories: colonisation and pulmonary aspergillosis (PA), which includes the different clinical forms of aspergillosis. A binary logistic regression model was performed to identify the predictive factors of PA. RESULTS: A total of 123 patients were included in the study: 48 (39.0%) with colonisation and 75 (61.0%) with PA: 68 with probable invasive pulmonary aspergillosis and 7 with chronic pulmonary aspergillosis. Spirometric stages of the GOLD classification were not correlated with a higher risk of PA. Four independent predictive factors of PA in COPD patients were identified: home oxygen therapy (OR: 4.39; 95% CI: 1.60-12.01; P = .004), bronchiectasis (OR: 3.61; 95% CI: 1.40-9.30; P = .008), hospital admission in the previous three months (OR: 3.12; 95% CI: 1.24-7.87; P = .016) and antifungal therapy against Candida spp. in the previous month (OR: 3.18; 95% CI: 1.16-8.73; P = .024). CONCLUSIONS: Continuous home oxygen therapy, bronchiectasis, hospital admission in the previous three months and administration of antifungal medication against Candida spp. in the previous month were associated with a higher risk of pulmonary aspergillosis in patients with COPD

Clinical factors associated with pulmonary aspergillosis in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. / Factores clínicos asociados a enfermedad pulmonar por Aspergillus spp. en pacientes con enfermedad pulmonar obstructiva crónica.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the clinical and epidemiological characteristics of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients with Aspergillus spp. isolation from respiratory samples, and to identify which factors may help us to distinguish between colonisation and infection. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed. All patients with COPD and respiratory isolation of Aspergillus spp. over a 12-year period were included. Patients were assigned to 2 categories: colonisation and pulmonary aspergillosis (PA), which includes the different clinical forms of aspergillosis. A binary logistic regression model was performed to identify the predictive factors of PA. RESULTS: A total of 123 patients were included in the study: 48 (39.0%) with colonisation and 75 (61.0%) with PA: 68 with probable invasive pulmonary aspergillosis and 7 with chronic pulmonary aspergillosis. Spirometric stages of the GOLD classification were not correlated with a higher risk of PA. Four independent predictive factors of PA in COPD patients were identified: home oxygen therapy (OR: 4.39; 95% CI: 1.60-12.01; P=.004), bronchiectasis (OR: 3.61; 95% CI: 1.40-9.30; P=.008), hospital admission in the previous three months (OR: 3.12; 95% CI: 1.24-7.87; P=.016) and antifungal therapy against Candida spp. in the previous month (OR: 3.18; 95% CI: 1.16-8.73; P=.024). CONCLUSIONS: Continuous home oxygen therapy, bronchiectasis, hospital admission in the previous three months and administration of antifungal medication against Candida spp. in the previous month were associated with a higher risk of pulmonary aspergillosis in patients with COPD.

Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma presenting as a primary bladder tumor: a case report.

INTRODUCTION: Primary lymphoma of the bladder represents 0.2% of all bladder malignancies. Secondary involvement of the bladder by malignant lymphoma occurs in 10% to 50% of cases. Most lymphomas of the bladder are non-Hodgkin's lymphomas of the B-cell type, with preponderance among women. The impact of positron emission tomography (PET) on tumor staging has recently become very important due to its use in the study of diagnosis extension and individual therapy design. CASE PRESENTATION: We report the case of a 79-year-old Caucasian man with intermittent haematuria as the presenting symptom of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma of the bladder. He was first diagnosed with primary lymphoma of the bladder using the current staging method, but a positron emission tomography study subsequently revealed that he instead had a secondary involvement of the bladder. CONCLUSION: The staging of non-Hodgkin's lymphomas, which is useful in order to plan accurate therapy, has been changing since the introduction of positron emission tomography scanning. Primary lymphomas of the bladder, although very rare, may be even more uncommon when this imaging technique is used to assess the extension of the disease. Although the interpretation of this technique has some limitations that should be taken into account, the extensive use of positron emission tomography should nonetheless help improve the diagnosis of this disease.