Clinical characteristics and outcomes in COVID-19 in kidney transplant recipients: a propensity score matched cohort study.

Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), especially those on dialysis or who have received a kidney transplant (KT), are considered more vulnerable to severe COVID-19. This susceptibility is attributed to advanced age, a higher frequency of comorbidities, and the chronic immunosuppressed state, which may exacerbate their susceptibility to severe outcomes. Therefore, our study aimed to compare the clinical characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 in KT patients with those on chronic dialysis and non-CKD patients in a propensity score-matched cohort study. This multicentric retrospective cohort included adult COVID-19 laboratory-confirmed patients admitted from March/2020 to July/2022, from 43 Brazilian hospitals. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Propensity score analysis matched KT recipients with controls - patients on chronic dialysis and those without CKD (within 0.25 standard deviations of the logit of the propensity score) - according to age, sex, number of comorbidities, and admission year. This study included 555 patients: 163 KT, 146 on chronic dialysis, and 249 non-CKD patients (median age 57 years, 55.2% women). With regards to clinical outcomes, chronic dialysis patients had a higher prevalence of acute heart failure, compared to KT recipients, furthermore, both groups presented high in-hospital mortality, 34.0 and 28.1%, for KT and chronic dialysis patients, respectively. When comparing KT and non-CKD patients, the first group had a higher incidence of in-hospital dialysis (26.4% vs. 8.8%, p < 0.001), septic shock (24.1% vs. 12.0%, p = 0.002), and mortality (32.5% vs. 23.3%, p = 0.039), in addition to longer time spent in the intensive care unit (ICU). In this study, chronic dialysis patients presented a higher prevalence of acute heart failure, compared to KT recipients, whereas KT patients had a higher frequency of complications than those without CKD, including septic shock, dialysis during hospitalization, and in-hospital mortality as well as longer time spent in the ICU.

AB2CO risk score for in-hospital mortality of COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care units.

PURPOSE: To develop a mortality risk score for COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU), and to compare it with other existing scores. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective observational study included consecutive adult patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 admitted to ICUs of 18 hospitals from nine Brazilian cities, from September 2021 to July 2022. Potential predictors were selected based on the literature review. Generalized Additive Models were used to examine outcomes and predictors. LASSO regression was used to derive the mortality score. RESULTS: From 558 patients, median age was 69 years (IQR 58-78), 56.3 % were men, 19.7 % required mechanical ventilation (MV), and 44.8 % died. The final model comprised six variables: age, pO2/FiO2, respiratory function (respiratory rate or if in MV), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and obesity. The AB2CO had an AUROC of 0.781 (95 % CI 0.744 to 0.819), good overall performance (Brier score = 0.191) and an excellent calibration (slope = 1.063, intercept = 0.015, p-value = 0.834). The model was compared with other scores and displayed better discrimination ability than the majority of them. CONCLUSIONS: The AB2CO score is a fast and easy tool to be used upon ICU admission.

Corrigendum: Assessment of risk scores to predict mortality of COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2023.1130218.].

Clinical characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 patients with preexisting dementia: a large multicenter propensity-matched Brazilian cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Although dementia has emerged as an important risk factor for severe SARS-CoV-2 infection, results on COVID-19-related complications and mortality are not consistent. We examined the clinical presentations and outcomes of COVID-19 in a multicentre cohort of in-hospital patients, comparing those with and without dementia. METHODS: This retrospective observational study comprises COVID-19 laboratory-confirmed patients aged ≥ 60 years admitted to 38 hospitals from 19 cities in Brazil. Data were obtained from electronic hospital records. A propensity score analysis was used to match patients with and without dementia (up to 3:1) according to age, sex, comorbidities, year, and hospital of admission. Our primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. We also assessed admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), kidney replacement therapy (KRT), sepsis, nosocomial infection, and thromboembolic events. RESULTS: Among 1,556 patients included in the study, 405 (4.5%) had a diagnosis of dementia and 1,151 were matched controls. When compared to matched controls, patients with dementia had a lower frequency of dyspnoea, cough, myalgia, headache, ageusia, and anosmia; and higher frequency of fever and delirium. They also had a lower frequency of ICU admission (32.7% vs. 47.1%, p < 0.001) and shorter ICU length of stay (7 vs. 9 days, p < 0.026), and a lower frequency of sepsis (17% vs. 24%, p = 0.005), KRT (6.4% vs. 13%, p < 0.001), and IVM (4.6% vs. 9.8%, p = 0.002). There were no differences in hospital mortality between groups. CONCLUSION: Clinical manifestations of COVID-19 differ between older inpatients with and without dementia. We observed that dementia alone could not explain the higher short-term mortality following severe COVID-19. Therefore, clinicians should consider other risk factors such as acute morbidity severity and baseline frailty when evaluating the prognosis of older adults with dementia hospitalised with COVID-19.

Assessment of the ABC2-SPH risk score to predict invasive mechanical ventilation in COVID-19 patients and comparison to other scores.

Background: Predicting the need for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) is important for the allocation of human and technological resources, improvement of surveillance, and use of effective therapeutic measures. This study aimed (i) to assess whether the ABC2-SPH score is able to predict the receipt of IMV in COVID-19 patients; (ii) to compare its performance with other existing scores; (iii) to perform score recalibration, and to assess whether recalibration improved prediction. Methods: Retrospective observational cohort, which included adult laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 patients admitted in 32 hospitals, from 14 Brazilian cities. This study was conducted in two stages: (i) for the assessment of the ABC2-SPH score and comparison with other available scores, patients hospitalized from July 31, 2020, to March 31, 2022, were included; (ii) for ABC2-SPH score recalibration and also comparison with other existing scores, patients admitted from January 1, 2021, to March 31, 2022, were enrolled. For both steps, the area under the receiving operator characteristic score (AUROC) was calculated for all scores, while a calibration plot was assessed only for the ABC2-SPH score. Comparisons between ABC2-SPH and the other scores followed the Delong Test recommendations. Logistic recalibration methods were used to improve results and adapt to the studied sample. Results: Overall, 9,350 patients were included in the study, the median age was 58.5 (IQR 47.0-69.0) years old, and 45.4% were women. Of those, 33.5% were admitted to the ICU, 25.2% received IMV, and 17.8% died. The ABC2-SPH score showed a significantly greater discriminatory capacity, than the CURB-65, STSS, and SUM scores, with potentialized results when we consider only patients younger than 80 years old (AUROC 0.714 [95% CI 0.698-0.731]). Thus, after the ABC2-SPH score recalibration, we observed improvements in calibration (slope = 1.135, intercept = 0.242) and overall performance (Brier score = 0.127). Conclusion: The ABC2-SPHr risk score demonstrated a good performance to predict the need for mechanical ventilation in COVID-19 hospitalized patients under 80 years of age.

Real-Life Data on Hydroxychloroquine or Chloroquine with or Without Azithromycin in COVID-19 Patients: A Retrospective Analysis in Brazil. / Dados de Vida Real sobre o Uso da Hidroxicloroquina ou da Cloroquina Combinadas ou Não à Azitromicina em Pacientes com Covid-19: Uma Análise Retrospectiva no Brasil.

BACKGROUND: Despite no evidence showing benefits of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine with or without azithromycin for COVID-19 treatment, these medications have been largely prescribed in Brazil. OBJECTIVES: To assess outcomes, including in-hospital mortality, electrocardiographic abnormalities, hospital length-of-stay, admission to the intensive care unit, and need for dialysis and mechanical ventilation, in hospitalized COVID-19 patients who received chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine, and to compare outcomes between those patients and their matched controls. METHODS: A retrospective multicenter cohort study that included consecutive laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 patients from 37 Brazilian hospitals from March to September 2020. Propensity score was used to select matching controls by age, sex, cardiovascular comorbidities, and in-hospital use of corticosteroid. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: From 7,850 COVID-19 patients, 673 (8.6%) received hydroxychloroquine and 67 (0.9%) chloroquine. The median age in the study group was 60 years (46 - 71) and 59.1% were women. During hospitalization, 3.2% of patients presented side effects and 2.2% required therapy discontinuation. Electrocardiographic abnormalities were more prevalent in the chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine group (13.2% vs. 8.2%, p=0.01), and the long corrected QT interval was the main difference (3.6% vs. 0.4%, p<0.001). The median hospital length of stay was longer in the HCQ/CQ + AZT group than in controls (9.0 [5.0, 18.0] vs. 8.0 [4.0, 14.0] days). There was no statistical differences between groups in intensive care unit admission (35.1% vs. 32.0%; p=0.282), invasive mechanical ventilation support (27.0% vs. 22.3%; p=0.074) or mortality (18.9% vs. 18.0%; p=0.682). CONCLUSION: COVID-19 patients treated with chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine had a longer hospital length of stay, when compared to matched controls. Intensive care unit admission, invasive mechanical ventilation, dialysis and in-hospital mortality were similar.

FUNDAMENTO: Apesar da ausência de evidência mostrando benefícios da hidroxicloroquina e da cloroquina combinadas ou não à azitromicina no tratamento da covid-19, esses medicamentos têm sido amplamente prescritos no Brasil. OBJETIVOS: Avaliar desfechos, incluindo moralidade hospitalar, alterações eletrocardiográficas, tempo de internação, admissão na unidade de terapia intensiva, e necessidade de diálise e de ventilação mecânica em pacientes hospitalizados com covid-19 que receberam cloroquina ou hidroxicloroquina, e comparar os desfechos entre aqueles pacientes e seus controles pareados. MÉTODOS: Estudo multicêntrico retrospectivo do tipo coorte que incluiu pacientes com diagnóstico laboratorial de covid-19 de 37 hospitais no Brasil de março a setembro de 2020. Escore de propensão foi usado para selecionar controles pareados quanto a idade, sexo, comorbidades cardiovasculares, e uso de corticosteroides durante a internação. Um valor de p<0,05 foi considerado estatisticamente significativo. RESULTADOS: Dos 7850 pacientes com covid-19, 673 (8,6%) receberam hidroxicloroquina e 67 (0,9%) cloroquina. A idade mediana no grupo de estudo foi 60 (46-71) anos e 59,1% eram mulheres. Durante a internação, 3,2% dos pacientes apresentaram efeitos adversos e 2,2% necessitaram de interromper o tratamento. Alterações eletrocardiográficas foram mais prevalentes no grupo hidroxicloroquina/cloroquina (13,2% vs. 8,2%, p=0,01), e o prolongamento do intervalo QT corrigido foi a principal diferença (3,6% vs. 0,4%, p<0,001). O tempo mediano de internação hospitalar foi maior no grupo usando CQ/HCQ em relação aos controles (9,0 [5,0-18,0] vs. 8,0 [4,0-14,0] dias). Não houve diferenças estatisticamente significativas entre os grupos quanto a admissão na unidade de terapia intensiva (35,1% vs. 32,0%; p=0,282), ventilação mecânica invasiva (27,0% vs. 22,3%; p=0,074) ou mortalidade (18,9% vs. 18,0%; p=0,682). CONCLUSÃO: Pacientes com covid-19 tratados com cloroquina ou hidroxicloroquina apresentaram maior tempo de internação hospitalar, em comparação aos controles. Não houve diferença em relação a admissão em unidade de terapia intensiva, necessidade de ventilação mecânica e mortalidade hospitalar.

Temporal validation of the MMCD score to predict kidney replacement therapy and in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury has been described as a common complication in patients hospitalized with COVID-19, which may lead to the need for kidney replacement therapy (KRT) in its most severe forms. Our group developed and validated the MMCD score in Brazilian COVID-19 patients to predict KRT, which showed excellent performance using data from 2020. This study aimed to validate the MMCD score in a large cohort of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in a different pandemic phase and assess its performance to predict in-hospital mortality. METHODS: This study is part of the "Brazilian COVID-19 Registry", a retrospective observational cohort of consecutive patients hospitalized for laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 in 25 Brazilian hospitals between March 2021 and August 2022. The primary outcome was KRT during hospitalization and the secondary was in-hospital mortality. We also searched literature for other prediction models for KRT, to assess the results in our database. Performance was assessed using area under the receiving operator characteristic curve (AUROC) and the Brier score. RESULTS: A total of 9422 patients were included, 53.8% were men, with a median age of 59 (IQR 48-70) years old. The incidence of KRT was 8.8% and in-hospital mortality was 18.1%. The MMCD score had excellent discrimination and overall performance to predict KRT (AUROC: 0.916 [95% CI 0.909-0.924]; Brier score = 0.057). Despite the excellent discrimination and overall performance (AUROC: 0.922 [95% CI 0.914-0.929]; Brier score = 0.100), the calibration was not satisfactory concerning in-hospital mortality. A random forest model was applied in the database, with inferior performance to predict KRT requirement (AUROC: 0.71 [95% CI 0.69-0.73]). CONCLUSION: The MMCD score is not appropriate for in-hospital mortality but demonstrates an excellent predictive ability to predict KRT in COVID-19 patients. The instrument is low cost, objective, fast and accurate, and can contribute to supporting clinical decisions in the efficient allocation of assistance resources in patients with COVID-19.

COVID-19 outcomes in people living with HIV: Peering through the waves.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate clinical characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 patients infected with HIV, and to compare with a paired sample without HIV infection. METHODS: This is a substudy of a Brazilian multicentric cohort that comprised two periods (2020 and 2021). Data was obtained through the retrospective review of medical records. Primary outcomes were admission to the intensive care unit, invasive mechanical ventilation, and death. Patients with HIV and controls were matched for age, sex, number of comorbidities, and hospital of origin using the technique of propensity score matching (up to 4:1). They were compared using the Chi-Square or Fisher's Exact tests for categorical variables and the Wilcoxon for numerical variables. RESULTS: Throughout the study, 17,101 COVID-19 patients were hospitalized, and 130 (0.76%) of those were infected with HIV. The median age was 54 (IQR: 43.0;64.0) years in 2020 and 53 (IQR: 46.0;63.5) years in 2021, with a predominance of females in both periods. People Living with HIV (PLHIV) and their controls showed similar prevalence for admission to the ICU and invasive mechanical ventilation requirement in the two periods, with no significant differences. In 2020, in-hospital mortality was higher in the PLHIV compared to the controls (27.9% vs. 17.7%; p = 0.049), but there was no difference in mortality between groups in 2021 (25.0% vs. 25.1%; p > 0.999). CONCLUSIONS: Our results reiterate that PLHIV were at higher risk of COVID-19 mortality in the early stages of the pandemic, however, this finding did not sustain in 2021, when the mortality rate is similar to the control group.

Assessment of risk scores to predict mortality of COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit.

Objectives: To assess the ABC2-SPH score in predicting COVID-19 in-hospital mortality, during intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and to compare its performance with other scores (SOFA, SAPS-3, NEWS2, 4C Mortality Score, SOARS, CURB-65, modified CHA2DS2-VASc, and a novel severity score). Materials and methods: Consecutive patients (≥ 18 years) with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 admitted to ICUs of 25 hospitals, located in 17 Brazilian cities, from October 2020 to March 2022, were included. Overall performance of the scores was evaluated using the Brier score. ABC2-SPH was used as the reference score, and comparisons between ABC2-SPH and the other scores were performed by using the Bonferroni method of correction. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Results: ABC2-SPH had an area under the curve of 0.716 (95% CI 0.693-0.738), significantly higher than CURB-65, SOFA, NEWS2, SOARS, and modified CHA2DS2-VASc scores. There was no statistically significant difference between ABC2-SPH and SAPS-3, 4C Mortality Score, and the novel severity score. Conclusion: ABC2-SPH was superior to other risk scores, but it still did not demonstrate an excellent predictive ability for mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients. Our results indicate the need to develop a new score, for this subset of patients.

Scale up of implementation of a multidimensional intervention to enhance hypertension and diabetes care at the primary care setting: A protocol for a cluster-randomized study in Brazil.

BACKGROUND: Hypertension and diabetes mellitus (DM) are highly prevalent in low and middle-income countries (LMICs), and the proportion of patients with uncontrolled diseases is higher than in high-income countries. Innovative strategies are required to surpass barriers of low sources, distance and quality of health care. Our aim is to assess the uptake and effectiveness of the implementation of an integrated multidimensional strategy in the primary care setting, for the management of people with hypertension and diabetes mellitus in Brazil. METHODS: This scale up implementation study called Control of Hypertension and diAbetes in MINas Gerais (CHArMING) Project has mixed-methods, and comprehends 4 steps: (1) needs assessment, including a standardized structured questionnaire and focus groups with health care practitioners; (2) baseline period, 3 months before the implementation of the intervention; (3) cluster randomized controlled trial (RCT) with a 12-months follow-up period; and (4) a qualitative study after the end of follow-up. The cluster RCT will randomize 35 centers to intervention (n = 18) or usual care (n = 17). Patients ≥18 years old, with diagnosis of hypertension and/or DM, of 5 Brazilian cities in a resource-constrained area will be enrolled. The intervention consists of a multifaceted strategy, with a multidisciplinary approach, including telehealth tools (decision support systems, short message service, telediagnosis), continued education with an approach to issues related to the care of people with hypertension and diabetes in primary care, including pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment and behavioral change. The project has actions focused on professionals and patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study consists of a multidimensional strategy with multidisciplinary approach using digital health to improve the control of hypertension and/or DM in the primary health care setting. We expect to provide the basis for implementing an innovative management program for hypertension and DM in Brazil, aiming to reduce the present and future burden of these diseases in Brazil and other LMICs. CLINICAL TRIAL IDENTIFIER: This study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov. (NCT05660928).

Potential and limitations of machine meta-learning (ensemble) methods for predicting COVID-19 mortality in a large inhospital Brazilian dataset.

The majority of early prediction scores and methods to predict COVID-19 mortality are bound by methodological flaws and technological limitations (e.g., the use of a single prediction model). Our aim is to provide a thorough comparative study that tackles those methodological issues, considering multiple techniques to build mortality prediction models, including modern machine learning (neural) algorithms and traditional statistical techniques, as well as meta-learning (ensemble) approaches. This study used a dataset from a multicenter cohort of 10,897 adult Brazilian COVID-19 patients, admitted from March/2020 to November/2021, including patients [median age 60 (interquartile range 48-71), 46% women]. We also proposed new original population-based meta-features that have not been devised in the literature. Stacking has shown to achieve the best results reported in the literature for the death prediction task, improving over previous state-of-the-art by more than 46% in Recall for predicting death, with AUROC 0.826 and MacroF1 of 65.4%. The newly proposed meta-features were highly discriminative of death, but fell short in producing large improvements in final prediction performance, demonstrating that we are possibly on the limits of the prediction capabilities that can be achieved with the current set of ML techniques and (meta-)features. Finally, we investigated how the trained models perform on different hospitals, showing that there are indeed large differences in classifier performance between different hospitals, further making the case that errors are produced by factors that cannot be modeled with the current predictors.

Clinical characteristics and outcomes of hospital-manifested COVID-19 among Brazilians.

OBJECTIVES: To analyze the clinical characteristics and outcomes of admitted patients with the hospital- versus community-manifested COVID-19 and to evaluate the risk factors related to mortality in the first population. METHODS: This retrospective cohort included consecutive adult patients with COVID-19, hospitalized between March and September 2020. The demographic data, clinical characteristics, and outcomes were extracted from medical records. Patients with hospital-manifested COVID-19 (study group) and those with community-manifested COVID-19 (control group) were matched by the propensity score model. Logistic regression models were used to verify the risk factors for mortality in the study group. RESULTS: Among 7,710 hospitalized patients who had COVID-19, 7.2% developed symptoms while admitted for other reasons. Patients with hospital-manifested COVID-19 had a higher prevalence of cancer (19.2% vs 10.8%) and alcoholism (8.8% vs 2.8%) than patients with community-manifested COVID-19 and also had a higher rate of intensive care unit requirement (45.1% vs 35.2%), sepsis (23.8% vs 14.5%), and death (35.8% vs 22.5%) (P <0.05 for all). The factors independently associated with increased mortality in the study group were increasing age, male sex, number of comorbidities, and cancer. CONCLUSION: Hospital-manifested COVID-19 was associated with increased mortality. Increasing age, male sex, number of comorbidities, and cancer were independent predictors of mortality among those with hospital-manifested COVID-19 disease.

Mechanical ventilation and death in pregnant patients admitted for COVID-19: a prognostic analysis from the Brazilian COVID-19 registry score.

BACKGROUND: The assessment of clinical prognosis of pregnant COVID-19 patients at hospital presentation is challenging, due to physiological adaptations during pregnancy. Our aim was to assess the performance of the ABC2-SPH score to predict in-hospital mortality and mechanical ventilation support in pregnant patients with COVID-19, to assess the frequency of adverse pregnancy outcomes, and characteristics of pregnant women who died. METHODS: This multicenter cohort included consecutive pregnant patients with COVID-19 admitted to the participating hospitals, from April/2020 to March/2022. Primary outcomes were in-hospital mortality and the composite outcome of mechanical ventilation support and in-hospital mortality. Secondary endpoints were pregnancy outcomes. The overall discrimination of the model was presented as the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). Overall performance was assessed using the Brier score. RESULTS: From 350 pregnant patients (median age 30 [interquartile range (25.2, 35.0)] years-old]), 11.1% had hypertensive disorders, 19.7% required mechanical ventilation support and 6.0% died. The AUROC for in-hospital mortality and for the composite outcome were 0.809 (95% IC: 0.641-0.944) and 0.704 (95% IC: 0.617-0.792), respectively, with good overall performance (Brier = 0.0384 and 0.1610, respectively). Calibration was good for the prediction of in-hospital mortality, but poor for the composite outcome. Women who died had a median age 4 years-old higher, higher frequency of hypertensive disorders (38.1% vs. 9.4%, p < 0.001) and obesity (28.6% vs. 10.6%, p = 0.025) than those who were discharged alive, and their newborns had lower birth weight (2000 vs. 2813, p = 0.001) and five-minute Apgar score (3.0 vs. 8.0, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The ABC2-SPH score had good overall performance for in-hospital mortality and the composite outcome mechanical ventilation and in-hospital mortality. Calibration was good for the prediction of in-hospital mortality, but it was poor for the composite outcome. Therefore, the score may be useful to predict in-hospital mortality in pregnant patients with COVID-19, in addition to clinical judgment. Newborns from women who died had lower birth weight and Apgar score than those who were discharged alive.

Dados de Vida Real sobre o Uso da Hidroxicloroquina ou da Cloroquina Combinadas ou Não à Azitromicina em Pacientes com Covid-19: Uma Análise Retrospectiva no Brasil / Real-Life Data on Hydroxychloroquine or Chloroquine with or Without Azithromycin in COVID-19 Patients: A Retrospective Analysis in Brazil

Resumo Fundamento Apesar da ausência de evidência mostrando benefícios da hidroxicloroquina e da cloroquina combinadas ou não à azitromicina no tratamento da covid-19, esses medicamentos têm sido amplamente prescritos no Brasil. Objetivos Avaliar desfechos, incluindo moralidade hospitalar, alterações eletrocardiográficas, tempo de internação, admissão na unidade de terapia intensiva, e necessidade de diálise e de ventilação mecânica em pacientes hospitalizados com covid-19 que receberam cloroquina ou hidroxicloroquina, e comparar os desfechos entre aqueles pacientes e seus controles pareados. Métodos Estudo multicêntrico retrospectivo do tipo coorte que incluiu pacientes com diagnóstico laboratorial de covid-19 de 37 hospitais no Brasil de março a setembro de 2020. Escore de propensão foi usado para selecionar controles pareados quanto a idade, sexo, comorbidades cardiovasculares, e uso de corticosteroides durante a internação. Um valor de p<0,05 foi considerado estatisticamente significativo. Resultados Dos 7850 pacientes com covid-19, 673 (8,6%) receberam hidroxicloroquina e 67 (0,9%) cloroquina. A idade mediana no grupo de estudo foi 60 (46-71) anos e 59,1% eram mulheres. Durante a internação, 3,2% dos pacientes apresentaram efeitos adversos e 2,2% necessitaram de interromper o tratamento. Alterações eletrocardiográficas foram mais prevalentes no grupo hidroxicloroquina/cloroquina (13,2% vs. 8,2%, p=0,01), e o prolongamento do intervalo QT corrigido foi a principal diferença (3,6% vs. 0,4%, p<0,001). O tempo mediano de internação hospitalar foi maior no grupo usando CQ/HCQ em relação aos controles (9,0 [5,0-18,0] vs. 8,0 [4,0-14,0] dias). Não houve diferenças estatisticamente significativas entre os grupos quanto a admissão na unidade de terapia intensiva (35,1% vs. 32,0%; p=0,282), ventilação mecânica invasiva (27,0% vs. 22,3%; p=0,074) ou mortalidade (18,9% vs. 18,0%; p=0,682). Conclusão Pacientes com covid-19 tratados com cloroquina ou hidroxicloroquina apresentaram maior tempo de internação hospitalar, em comparação aos controles. Não houve diferença em relação a admissão em unidade de terapia intensiva, necessidade de ventilação mecânica e mortalidade hospitalar.

Abstract Background Despite no evidence showing benefits of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine with or without azithromycin for COVID-19 treatment, these medications have been largely prescribed in Brazil. Objectives To assess outcomes, including in-hospital mortality, electrocardiographic abnormalities, hospital length-of-stay, admission to the intensive care unit, and need for dialysis and mechanical ventilation, in hospitalized COVID-19 patients who received chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine, and to compare outcomes between those patients and their matched controls. Methods A retrospective multicenter cohort study that included consecutive laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 patients from 37 Brazilian hospitals from March to September 2020. Propensity score was used to select matching controls by age, sex, cardiovascular comorbidities, and in-hospital use of corticosteroid. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results From 7,850 COVID-19 patients, 673 (8.6%) received hydroxychloroquine and 67 (0.9%) chloroquine. The median age in the study group was 60 years (46 - 71) and 59.1% were women. During hospitalization, 3.2% of patients presented side effects and 2.2% required therapy discontinuation. Electrocardiographic abnormalities were more prevalent in the chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine group (13.2% vs. 8.2%, p=0.01), and the long corrected QT interval was the main difference (3.6% vs. 0.4%, p<0.001). The median hospital length of stay was longer in the HCQ/CQ + AZT group than in controls (9.0 [5.0, 18.0] vs. 8.0 [4.0, 14.0] days). There was no statistical differences between groups in intensive care unit admission (35.1% vs. 32.0%; p=0.282), invasive mechanical ventilation support (27.0% vs. 22.3%; p=0.074) or mortality (18.9% vs. 18.0%; p=0.682). Conclusion COVID-19 patients treated with chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine had a longer hospital length of stay, when compared to matched controls. Intensive care unit admission, invasive mechanical ventilation, dialysis and in-hospital mortality were similar.

COVID-19 outcomes in people living with HIV: Peering through the waves

Abstract Objective To evaluate clinical characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 patients infected with HIV, and to compare with a paired sample without HIV infection. Methods This is a substudy of a Brazilian multicentric cohort that comprised two periods (2020 and 2021). Data was obtained through the retrospective review of medical records. Primary outcomes were admission to the intensive care unit, invasive mechanical ventilation, and death. Patients with HIV and controls were matched for age, sex, number of comorbidities, and hospital of origin using the technique of propensity score matching (up to 4:1). They were compared using the Chi-Square or Fisher's Exact tests for categorical variables and the Wilcoxon for numerical variables. Results Throughout the study, 17,101 COVID-19 patients were hospitalized, and 130 (0.76%) of those were infected with HIV. The median age was 54 (IQR: 43.0;64.0) years in 2020 and 53 (IQR: 46.0;63.5) years in 2021, with a predominance of females in both periods. People Living with HIV (PLHIV) and their controls showed similar prevalence for admission to the ICU and invasive mechanical ventilation requirement in the two periods, with no significant differences. In 2020, in-hospital mortality was higher in the PLHIV compared to the controls (27.9% vs. 17.7%; p = 0.049), but there was no difference in mortality between groups in 2021 (25.0% vs. 25.1%; p > 0.999). Conclusions Our results reiterate that PLHIV were at higher risk of COVID-19 mortality in the early stages of the pandemic, however, this finding did not sustain in 2021, when the mortality rate is similar to the control group.

Frequency and burden of neurological manifestations upon hospital presentation in COVID-19 patients: Findings from a large Brazilian cohort.

BACKGROUND: Scientific data regarding the prevalence of COVID-19 neurological manifestations and prognosis in Latin America countries is still lacking. Therefore, the study aims to understand neurological manifestations of SARS-CoV 2 infection and outcomes in the Brazilian population. METHODS: This study is part of the Brazilian COVID-19 Registry, a multicentric cohort, including data from 37 hospitals. For the present analysis, patients were grouped according to the presence of reported symptoms (i.e., headache; anosmia and ageusia; syncope and dizziness) vs. clinically-diagnosed neurological manifestations (clinically-defined neurological syndrome: neurological signs or diagnoses captured by clinical evaluation) and matched with patients without neurological manifestations by age, sex, number of comorbidities, hospital of admission, and whether or not patients had underlying neurological disease. RESULTS: From 6,635 hospitalized patients with COVID-19, 30.8% presented reported neurological manifestations, 10.3% were diagnosed with a neurological syndrome and 60.1% did not show any neurological manifestations. In patients with reported symptoms, the most common ones were headache (20.7%), ageusia (11.1%) and anosmia (8.0%). In patients with neurological syndromes, acute encephalopathy was the most common diagnosis (9.7%). In the matched analysis, patients with neurological syndromes presented more cases of septic shock (17.0 vs. 13.0%, p = 0.045), intensive care unit admission (45.3 vs. 38.9%, p = 0.023), and mortality (38.7 vs. 32.6%, p = 0.026; and 39.2 vs. 30.3%, p < 0.001) when compared to controls. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 in-hospital patients with clinically defined neurological syndromes presented a higher incidence of septic shock, ICU admission and death when compared to controls.

Pandemic-Related Impairment in the Monitoring of Patients With Hypertension and Diabetes and the Development of a Digital Solution for the Community Health Worker: Quasiexperimental and Implementation Study.

BACKGROUND: The restrictions imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic reduced health service access by patients with chronic diseases. The discontinuity of care is a cause of great concern, mainly in vulnerable regions. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on people with hypertension and diabetes mellitus (DM) regarding the frequency of consultations and whether their disease was kept under control. The study also aimed to develop and implement a digital solution to improve monitoring at home. METHODS: This is a multimethodological study. A quasiexperimental evaluation assessed the impact of the pandemic on the frequency of consultations and control of patients with hypertension and DM in 34 primary health care centers in 10 municipalities. Then, an implementation study developed an app with a decision support system (DSS) for community health workers (CHWs) to identify and address at-risk patients with uncontrolled hypertension or DM. An expert panel assessment evaluated feasibility, usability, and utility of the software. RESULTS: Of 5070 patients, 4810 (94.87%) had hypertension, 1371 (27.04%) had DM, and 1111 (21.91%) had both diseases. There was a significant reduction in the weekly number of consultations (107, IQR 60.0-153.0 before vs 20.0, IQR 7.0-29.0 after social restriction; P<.001). Only 15.23% (772/5070) of all patients returned for a consultation during the pandemic. Individuals with hypertension had lower systolic (120.0, IQR 120.0-140.0 mm Hg) and diastolic (80.0, IQR 80.0-80.0 mm Hg) blood pressure than those who did not return (130.0, IQR 120.0-140.0 mm Hg and 80.0, IQR 80.0-90.0 mm Hg, respectively; P<.001). Also, those who returned had a higher proportion of controlled hypertension (64.3% vs 52.8%). For DM, there were no differences in glycohemoglobin levels. Concerning the DSS, the experts agreed that the CHWs can easily incorporate it into their routines and the app can identify patients at risk and improve treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic caused a significant drop in the number of consultations for patients with hypertension and DM in primary care. A DSS for CHW has proved to be feasible, useful, and easily incorporated into their routines.

Hibiscus sabdariffa tea affects diet-induced thermogenesis and subjective satiety responses in healthy men but not in women: a randomized crossover trial.

The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of Hibiscus sabdariffa tea on energy expenditure, satiety response and food intake. This is an open-label, crossover, randomized clinical trial that comprised 21 subjects (11 women, 10 men). The individuals were evaluated at acute moments (fasting and after eating standardized breakfast accompanied by water or H. sabdariffa tea). Resting energy expenditure was measured by indirect calorimetry, subjective satiety responses were evaluated with a visual analogue scale and food intake was assessed by using food records. The volunteers who drank the H. sabdariffa tea had lower perception of hunger (p = 0.002) and greater feeling of satiety (p = 0.01) and fullness (p = 0.009) compared to control. Men who ingested the H. sabdariffa tea had an increase in nitrogen energy expenditure (water: 1501 ± 290.7 kcal, H. sabdariffa tea: 1619 ± 288.9 kcal; p = 0.029). In comparison to control, men presented less perception of hunger (p = 0.003) and desire to eat (p = 0.016), increased satiety (p = 0.021) and fullness (p = 0.01), and women oxidized more fat (p = 0.034) when they drank H. sabdariffa tea. There was no difference between treatments regarding the energy and macronutrient intake from the first meal and throughout the day (p > 0.05) for all participants. The H. sabdariffa tea only affected energy expenditure and satiety responses in men. Clinical trial registry: ReBEC Platform of the Brazilian Clinical Trials Registry (https://ensaiosclinicos.gov.br/) - RBR-5HZ86T. Novelty: H. sabdariffa tea promoted an increase in energy expenditure and caused less perception of hunger/desire to eat in men. H. sabdariffa tea intake increased postprandial fat oxidation in women.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation outcomes in COVID-19 patients: Case series from the Brazilian COVID-19 Registry.

Around 5% of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients develop critical disease, with severe pneumonia and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). In these cases, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) may be considered when conventional therapy fails. This study aimed to describe the clinical characteristics and in-hospital outcomes of COVID-19 patients with ARDS refractory to lung-protective ventilation and prone positioning on ECMO support, as well as to review the available literature on ECMO use and COVID-19 patients' outcome. Patients from this case series were selected from the Brazilian COVID-19 Registry. From the 7646 patients included in the registry, only eight received ECMO support (0.1%), in four hospitals. The median age of the entire sample was 59 (interquartile range 54.2-64.4) years old and 87.5% were male. Hypertension (50.0%), diabetes mellitus (50.0%) and obesity (37.5%) were the most frequent comorbidities. The indications for ECMO were PaO2 /FiO2 ratio <80 mm Hg for more than 6 h or PaO2 /FiO2 ratio <60 mm Hg for more than 3 h. The mortality rate was 87.5%. In conclusion, in this case series of COVID-19 patients with ARDS refractory to conventional therapy who received ECMO support, a very high mortality was observed. Our findings are not different from previous studies including a small number of patients; however, there is a huge difference from Extracorporeal Life Support Organization results, which encourages us to keep looking for improvement.

Chagas disease and SARS-CoV-2 coinfection does not lead to worse in-hospital outcomes.

Chagas disease (CD) continues to be a major public health burden in Latina America. Information on the interplay between COVID-19 and CD is lacking. Our aim was to assess clinical characteristics and in-hospital outcomes of patients with CD and COVID-19, and to compare it to non-CD patients. Consecutive patients with confirmed COVID-19 were included from March to September 2020. Genetic matching for sex, age, hypertension, diabetes mellitus and hospital was performed in a 4:1 ratio. Of the 7018 patients who had confirmed COVID-19, 31 patients with CD and 124 matched controls were included (median age 72 (64-80) years-old, 44.5% were male). At baseline, heart failure (25.8% vs. 9.7%) and atrial fibrillation (29.0% vs. 5.6%) were more frequent in CD patients than in the controls (p < 0.05). C-reactive protein levels were lower in CD patients compared with the controls (55.5 [35.7, 85.0] vs. 94.3 [50.7, 167.5] mg/dL). In-hospital management, outcomes and complications were similar between the groups. In this large Brazilian COVID-19 Registry, CD patients had a higher prevalence of atrial fibrillation and chronic heart failure compared with non-CD controls, with no differences in-hospital outcomes. The lower C-reactive protein levels in CD patients require further investigation.