Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Más filtros











Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Cureus ; 16(8): e67256, 2024 Aug.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39301377

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Step-based dosing of anticoagulants has been widely implemented for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but no studies have comprehensively evaluated the effectiveness and safety of this approach. We aimed to investigate whether step-based dosing of anticoagulants was associated with clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19 compared with standard prophylactic dosing. METHOD: We conducted a retrospective cohort study on adults hospitalized with moderate-to-severe COVID-19. The exposure was step-based dosing of anticoagulants, including prophylactic anticoagulants (PrA), prophylactic-switching-to-therapeutic anticoagulants (Pr-to-ThA), therapeutic anticoagulants (ThA), and therapeutic-switching-to-prophylactic anticoagulants (Th-to-PrA). The primary effectiveness outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality, admission to an intensive care unit (ICU admission), stroke, and venous thromboembolism (VTE). The primary safety outcome was a composite of major and minor/clinically relevant non-major (CRNM) bleeding. RESULTS: Among 1,081 records for analysis (mean age 59.9, 49.9% being female), during a median follow-up of 15 days, the primary effectiveness outcome occurred in 333 patients (33.5% in the PrA group, 24.6% in the Pr-to-ThA group, 23.7% in the Th-to-PrA group, and 38.0% in the ThA group). Compared with the PrA group, patients receiving Pr-to-ThA had a lower risk of the primary effectiveness outcome (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.64, 95% CI: 0.45 to 0.90, Dunnett-adjusted p = 0.01), while those in the Th-to-PrA and ThA were more likely to experience the primary safety outcome (Th-to-PrA, aOR = 3.00, 95% CI: 1.53 to 5.89; ThA, aOR = 3.05, 95% CI: 1.61 to 5.79). CONCLUSION: In adults hospitalized with moderate-to-severe COVID-19, compared with standard PrA, the step-based dose-increasing therapy was associated with a lower composite risk of all-cause mortality, ICU admission, stroke, or VTE without evidence of a higher risk of bleeding. ThA dosing was associated with an increase in the bleeding risk, primarily minor and CRNM bleeding.

2.
BMC Infect Dis ; 24(1): 945, 2024 Sep 09.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39251986

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The mortality risk of co-infections/secondary infections (CoI/ScI) is under-reported in patients with non-critical COVID-19, leading to the under-management of CoI/ScI and publication bias in the medical literature. We aimed to investigate the association between CoI/ScI and mortality in patients hospitalised with mild-to-severe COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study at a COVID-19 treatment hospital in Vietnam and collected all eligible medical records, with CoI/ScI status as the exposure (non-CoI/ScI and CoI/ScI, with the latter including nature of pathogen [bacterial, fungal, or bacterial + fungal] and multidrug-resistance pathogen [no MDRp or ≥ 1 MDRp]). The outcome was all-cause mortality, defined as in-hospital death by all causes or being discharged under critical illness. We used time-dependent analysis to report rates of mortality with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI, Poisson regression) and hazard ratios (HR) with 95% CI (Cox proportional hazards regression with Holm's method for multiplicity control). RESULTS: We followed 1466 patients (median age 61, 56.4% being female) for a median of 9 days. We recorded 387 (26.4%) deaths (95/144 [66.0%] in the CoI/ScI group and 292/1322 [22.1%] in the non-CoI/ScI group). Adjusted mortality rates (per 100 person-days) of the CoI/ScI (6.4, 95% CI 5.3 to 7.8), including bacterial (8.0, 95% CI 7.2 to 8.9), no MDRp (5.9, 95% CI 4.8 to 7.4), and ≥ 1 MDRp (9.0, 95% CI 8.2 to 10.0) groups were higher than that of the non-CoI/ScI group (2.0, 95% CI 1.8 to 2.2). These corresponded to higher risks of mortality in the overall CoI/ScI (HR 3.27, 95% CI 2.58 to 4.13, adjusted p < 0.001), bacterial CoI/ScI (HR 3.79, 95% CI 2.97 to 4.83, adjusted p < 0.001), no MDRp CoI/ScI (HR 3.13, 95% CI 2.42 to 4.05, adjusted p < 0.001), and ≥ 1 MDRp CoI/ScI group (HR 3.89, 95% CI 2.44 to 6.21, adjusted p < 0.001). We could not attain reliable estimates for fungal and bacterial + fungal CoI/ScI. CONCLUSION: Compared with the non-CoI/ScI group, patients with CoI/ScI had a significantly higher risk of all-cause mortality, regardless of resistance status. More evidence is needed to confirm the mortality risks in patients with fungal or bacterial + fungal CoI/ScI.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Coinfección , SARS-CoV-2 , Humanos , Vietnam/epidemiología , COVID-19/mortalidad , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/complicaciones , Masculino , Femenino , Estudios Retrospectivos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Coinfección/mortalidad , Coinfección/epidemiología , Coinfección/microbiología , Anciano , Adulto , Infecciones Bacterianas/mortalidad , Infecciones Bacterianas/epidemiología , Micosis/epidemiología , Micosis/mortalidad , Micosis/microbiología , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Mortalidad Hospitalaria
3.
BMC Infect Dis ; 24(1): 25, 2024 Jan 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38166755

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Antivirals have been given widely for patients with COVID-19 breakthrough in Asian countries, creating a "black market" for unapproved and unprescribed medications. More evidence is needed to clarify the benefits of antivirals in these settings. METHODS: We conducted a random-sampling retrospective cohort study at a general hospital in Vietnam. We recruited patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 breakthrough who were given either standard of care (SoC) alone or SoC + antiviral. Primary outcome was residual respiratory symptoms that lasted > 7 days. Secondary outcome was long COVID-19, diagnosed by specialized physicians. We used logistic regression to measure odds ratio (OR), in addition to a sensitivity and subgroup analyses to further explore the results. RESULTS: A total of 142 patients (mean age 36.2 ± 9.8) were followed. We recorded residual symptoms in 27.9% and 20.3% of the SoC and SoC + antiviral group, while the figures for long COVID-19 were 11.8% and 8.1%, respectively. Antiviral use was not significantly associated with lower the risks of residual symptoms (OR = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.22-1.20, p = 0.12) or long COVID-19 (OR = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.16-1.90, p = 0.35). The sensitivity and subgroup analyses did not show any significant differences between the study groups (all p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Antivirals were not associated with faster resolution of respiratory symptoms or lower risks of long COVID-19. Further studies should focus on different antivirals to confirm their effects on different sub-populations. Meanwhile, antivirals should only be used in very high-risk patients to avoid excessive costs and harms.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , Adulto , Persona de Mediana Edad , Síndrome Post Agudo de COVID-19 , Estudios Retrospectivos , Antivirales/uso terapéutico
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA