RESUMEN
Background: Remdesivir treatment was associated with a reduced 28-day mortality and recovery time among patients hospitalized with severe COVID-19. Favipiravir is broadly used to treat COVID-19. However, various studies have had conflicting results on the efficacy of favipiravir for COVID-19. We hypothesized that remdesivir is more effective in clinical outcomes regarding the 29-day mortality rates, length of stay, and recovery rate than favipiravir in patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 pneumonia. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study that included adult hospitalized COVID-19 pneumonia patients with hypoxemia. Patients were classified into two groups according to the antiviral drugs. Age, oxygen saturation, fraction of inspired oxygen, and Charlson comorbidity index were used for propensity score matching. The primary objective was to determine whether the type of antiviral agent is associated with 29-day mortality. Other outcomes were the 15-day recovery rate and the length of intensive care unit or hospital stay. Results: A total of 249 patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 pneumonia were included. With an adjustment for propensity score-matched, there were 204 patients for further analysis (102 patients in each antiviral drug group). Remdesivir patients had higher Radiographic Assessment of Lung Edema (RALE) scores on Chest X-ray (14.32±9.08 vs 11.34±8.46; standardized mean difference =33.9%). The Charlson Comorbidity Index Scores were comparable. The prevalences of diabetes, obesity, hypertension, and non-HIV immunocompromised state were higher in the remdesivir group. Regarding the primary outcomes, after adjusting by diabetes, obesity, and RALE score, there was no difference in the 29-day mortality rate between both groups [26 patients (25.5%) in the remdesivir group vs 28 patients (27.5%) in the favipiravir group]. The Kaplan-Meier curve analysis at 29 days indicated no significant difference in cumulative survival rate. The two groups' adjusted hazard ratio was 0.72; 95% CI, 0.41 to 1.25, p=0.24. A Kaplan-Meier analysis on the 15-day cumulative survival rate observed a trend towards a higher survival rate in the remdesivir group (adjusted hazard ratio 0.41; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.84; p= 0.02) The proportion of patients who recovered on day 15, the length of intensive care unit(ICU) stays, and the hospital stay were not different between remdesivir and favipiravir groups (62 patients (60.8%) vs 56 patients (54.9%), p=0.39; 11.48 ± 11.88 days vs 10.87 ± 9.31 days, p=0.69; and 16.64±14.28 days vs 16.59 ±11.31 days, p=0.98, respectively). Conclusion: In patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 pneumonia, Remdesivir did not demonstrate superior benefits over Favipiravir regarding 29-day mortality, 15-day recovery rates, or hospital and ICU stay lengths. However, further investigation into the 15-day cumulative survival rate revealed a trend towards improved survival in the Remdesivir group.
RESUMEN
To examine the effectiveness of azvudine and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in treating hospitalized patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19. We emulated a target trial with a multicenter retrospective cohort of hospitalized adults with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 without contraindications for azvudine or nirmatrelvir-ritonavir between December 01, 2022 and January 19, 2023 (during the Omicron BA.5.2 variant wave). Exposures included treatment with azvudine or nirmatrelvir-ritonavir for 5 days versus no antiviral treatment during hospitalization. Primary composite outcome (all-cause death and initiation of invasive mechanical ventilation), and their separate events were evaluated. Of the 1154 patients, 27.2% were severe cases. In the intent-to-treat analyses, azvudine reduced all-cause death (Hazard ratio [HR]: 0.31; 95% CI: 0.12-0.78), and its composite with invasive mechanical ventilation (HR: 0.47; 95% CI: 0.24-0.92). Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir reduced invasive mechanical ventilation (HR: 0.42; 95% CI: 0.17-1.05), and its composite with all-cause death (HR: 0.38; 95% CI: 0.18-0.81). The study did not identify credible subgroup effects. The per-protocol analyses and all sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the findings. Both azvudine and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir improved the prognosis of hospitalized adults with moderate-to-severe COVID-19.
Asunto(s)
Antivirales , Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Ritonavir , Adulto , Humanos , Antivirales/uso terapéutico , Estudios Retrospectivos , Ritonavir/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
Akimoto K, Asano S, Satoh Y, Yokogushi K. Changes in respiratory, physical, and mental conditions in moderate and severe COVID-19 cases at our convalescent rehabilitation ward. Jpn J Compr Rehabil Sci 2023; 14: 10-15. Purpose: This study clarified the changes in respiratory condition, and physical and mental functions pertaining to them, of patients with the coronavirus disease 2019 ("COVID-19") who were admitted to our convalescent rehabilitation ward. It also examined the conditions remaining after the disease (long-COVID). Methods: We focused on 16 moderate and severe patients with COVID-19 who were transferred to our convalescent rehabilitation ward and discharged home between March and September 2021. We evaluated the patients' respiratory, physical, and mental conditions at the time of admission, four weeks after admission, and at the time of discharge. Results: We confirmed an improvement in the shortness of breath in those with respiratory conditions, and a significant improvement in the walking distance related to physical function before the time of discharge, but anxiety and depression remained. Conclusion: Patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 can be discharged home after convalescent rehabilitation. Despite improved dyspnea and walking distance, the patients tend to have incomplete recovery, including physical deconditioning, mood disorders, and other long-COVID conditions at discharge.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Persistent post-acute coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms (PACSs) have been reported up to 6 months after hospital discharge. Herein we assessed the symptoms that persisted 12 months (M12) after admission for COVID-19 in the longitudinal prospective national French coronavirus disease cohort. METHODS: Hospitalized patients with a confirmed virological diagnosis of COVID-19 were enrolled. Follow-up was planned until M12 after admission. Associations between persistence of ≥3 PACSs at M12 and clinical characteristics at admission were assessed through logistic regression according to gender. RESULTS: We focused on participants enrolled between 24 January 2020 and 15 July 2020, to allow M12 follow-up. The M12 data were available for 737 participants. Median age was 61 years, 475 (64%) were men and 242/647 (37%) were admitted to intensive care units during the acute phase. At M12, 27% (194/710) of the participants had ≥3 persistent PACS, mostly fatigue, dyspnoea and joint pain. Among those who had a professional occupation before the acute phase, 91 out of 339 (27%) were still on sick leave at M12. Presence of ≥3 persistent PACS was associated with female gender, both anxiety and depression, impaired health-related quality of life and Medical Muscle Research Council Scale <57. Compared with men, women more often reported presence of ≥3 persistent PACSs (98/253, 39% vs. 96/457, 21%), depression and anxiety (18/152, 12% vs. 17/268, 6% and 33/156, 21% vs. 26/264, 10%, respectively), impaired physical health-related quality of life (76/141, 54% vs. 120/261, 46%). Women had less often returned to work than men (77/116, 66% vs. 171/223, 77%). CONCLUSIONS: One fourth of the individuals admitted to hospital for COVID-19 still had ≥3 persistent PACSs at M12 post-discharge. Women reported more often ≥3 persistent PACSs, suffered more from anxiety and depression and had less often returned to work than men.