Efficacy of corticosteroid therapy for oxygen-free coronavirus disease 2019-derived pneumonia.

Corticosteroid therapy for oxygen-free coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is not recommended due to its negative prognostic impact, but the efficacy of corticosteroids when limited to COVID-19 pneumonia is unclear. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of corticosteroid monotherapy for patients with COVID-19 pneumonia without supplemental oxygen. We retrospectively reviewed patients with oxygen-free COVID-19 pneumonia at our institute between September 2020 and August 2021 and assessed the use of corticosteroids and the timing of initiation. We classified the patients into the following 2 groups: those who were initiated corticosteroids without developing respiratory failure (early steroid group) and those who were not (standard of care [SOC] group). We used inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPW) to balance between the groups. The primary outcome was the incidence of respiratory failure. A total of 144 patient records were reviewed; 63 patients were in the early steroid group and 81 patients were in the SOC group. Of all patients, 14 (22.2%) and 27 (33.3%) patients in the early steroid and SOC group, respectively, required supplemental oxygen (P = .192). After adjusted by the IPW method, 10 (16.0%) and 32 (40.1%) patients in the early steroid and SOC groups, respectively, required supplemental oxygen (P = .004). The logistic regression analysis indicated that early corticosteroid use was significantly associated with a decreased incidence of respiratory failure (odds ratio; 0.17, 95% confidence intervals; 0.06-0.46, P < .001). Corticosteroid monotherapy may suppress the development of exacerbation requiring oxygen supply in patients with oxygen-free COVID-19 pneumonia.

Comparison of ceftriaxone plus macrolide and ampicillin/sulbactam plus macrolide in treatment for patients with community-acquired pneumonia without risk factors for aspiration: an open-label, quasi-randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Ceftriaxone (CTRX) and ampicillin/sulbactam (ABPC/SBT) are recommended by various guidelines as the first-line antibiotics for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). However, which of these antibiotics is more effective for treating non-aspiration CAP remains unclear. METHODS: This study was a prospective, single-center, open-label, quasi-randomized controlled trial. Patients with adult CAP without risk for aspiration were allocated to either a CTRX or ABPC/SBT group based on the date of hospital admission. Macrolide was added to patients in each group. The primary outcome was the clinical response in the validated per-protocol (VPP) population at end of treatment (EOT). The secondary outcomes were clinical response during treatment and at end of study (EOS) in the VPP population, and mortality rate at day 30 in the modified intention-to-treat (MITT) population. RESULTS: Of 696 screened patients, 433 patients were excluded and 263 patients were allocated to receive either of the treatments. Males comprised 54% of patients and mean age and PSI were 62.1 ± 19.8 years and 69.3 ± 30.0, respectively, with 124 patients allocated to the CTRX group and 138 patients allocated to the ABPC/SBT group. The clinical effectiveness rate for the VPP population at EOT was 90% in the CTRX and 96% in the ABPC/SBT group (p = 0.072, 95% confidence interval [CI] of risk difference [RD]: - 12.6-0.8%). No significant difference in effectiveness at day 4 was observed between the CTRX and ABPC/SBT groups (p = 0.079, 95%CI of RD: - 12.1-0.4%), but at day 7, ABPC/SBT was significantly more effective than CTRX in the VPP population (p = 0.047, 95%CI of RD: - 13.3--0.4%). No significant difference in late response at EOS was seen between CTRX and ABPC/SBT groups: cure (89 [86%] and 102 [94%]), relapse (5 [5%] and 1 [1%]) and failure (10 [10%] and 5 [5%]; p = 0.053). Deaths within 30 days in MITT population was higher in CTRX group (4 [3%]) than in ABPC/SBT group (0 [0%]) (p = 0.048, 95%CI of RD: 0.1-6.3%). CONCLUSION: No significant difference in effectiveness was found between ABPC/SBT and CTRX at EOT. However, ABPC/SBT might be more effective in the early phase of treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: UMIN-CTR, UMIN000037464. Registered 25 July 2019 - Retrospectively registered, https://upload.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000042262.

Pembrolizumab-Induced Rhabdomyolysis With Myositis in a Patient With Lung Adenocarcinoma / Rabdomiolisis con miositis inducida por pembrolizumab en un paciente con adenocarcinoma pulmonar

No disponible

Diffuse Pulmonary Uptake of Gallium-67 Induced by Pulmonary Mycobacterium mucogenicum and Mycobacterium phocaicum Infection / Acumulación pulmonar difusa de galio-67 inducida por infección pulmonar por Mycobacterium mucogenicum y Mycobacterium phocaicum

No disponible

Gran absceso pulmonar con seudoaneurisma de la arteria pulmonar / Large Lung Abscess with Pulmonary Artery Pseudoaneurysm

No disponible

Cases of Pulmonary Mycobacterium szulgai Infection Leading to Pneumothorax and Spontaneous Remission / Casos de infección pulmonar por Mycobacterium szulgai que lleva a neumotórax con remisión espontánea

No disponible

¿Es segura la pleurodesis con solución de glucosa al 50% en pacientes con neumotórax espontáneo? A propósito de una serie de casos / Is pleurodesis with 50% glucose solution in patients with spontaneous pneumothorax safe?: A case series

No disponible

¿Es la hiperplasia histiocítica nodular una causa del derrame pleural asociado con el dasatinib? / Nodular histiocytic hyperplasia: Is this a cause of dasatinib-pleural effusion?

No disponible