Dexamethasone versus methylprednisolone for multiple organ dysfunction in COVID-19 critically ill patients: a multicenter propensity score matching study.

BACKGROUND: Dexamethasone usually recommended for patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) to reduce short-term mortality. However, it is uncertain if another corticosteroid, such as methylprednisolone, may be utilized to obtain better clinical outcome. This study assessed dexamethasone's clinical and safety outcomes compared to methylprednisolone. METHODS: A multicenter, retrospective cohort study was conducted between March 01, 2020, and July 31, 2021. It included adult COVID-19 patients who were initiated on either dexamethasone or methylprednisolone therapy within 24 h of intensive care unit (ICU) admission. The primary outcome was the progression of multiple organ dysfunction score (MODS) on day three of ICU admission. Propensity score (PS) matching was used (1:3 ratio) based on the patient's age and MODS within 24 h of ICU admission. RESULTS: After Propensity Score (PS) matching, 264 patients were included; 198 received dexamethasone, while 66 patients received methylprednisolone within 24 h of ICU admission. In regression analysis, patients who received methylprednisolone had a higher MODS on day three of ICU admission than those who received dexamethasone (beta coefficient: 0.17 (95% CI 0.02, 0.32), P = 0.03). Moreover, hospital-acquired infection was higher in the methylprednisolone group (OR 2.17, 95% CI 1.01, 4.66; p = 0.04). On the other hand, the 30-day and the in-hospital mortality were not statistically significant different between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Dexamethasone showed a lower MODS on day three of ICU admission compared to methylprednisolone, with no statistically significant difference in mortality.

Superinfection rate among the patients treated with carbapenem versus piperacillin/tazobactam: Retrospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Superinfection is a new isolate pathogen after 48 h of antibiotic treatment or within one week of treatment discontinuation. In many studies carbapenem and piperacillin-tazobactam were associated with high risk of superinfection. AIM: To evaluate the rate of superinfections during carbapenem and piperacillin/tazobactam treatment. Also, to identify risk factors for superinfections. METHODS: A Retrospective observational study was conducted in King Abdulaziz Medical City. Approval from the institutional Review Board was obtained. The study included all adult patient treated with carbapenem or piperacillin/tazobactam for more than 72 h. Univariate and multivariate analysis was conducted to compare piperacillin/tazobactam versus carbapenems and to identify the associated risk factor to develop superinfection. FINDING: 507 patients were included in this study. The mean age of the patients was 61 years ± 19.33. Of these, 278 received carbapenems and 229 received piperacillin/tazobactam. In univariate analysis superinfections were significantly higher with carbapenems compared with piperacillin-tazobactam (28.77% versus 20.96%; P value = 0.044). After adjustment of cofounders in multivariate analysis, presence of tracheostomy, endotracheal ventilation, foley catheter and duration of antibiotic were associated with higher risk to developed superinfection adjusted odd ratio (aOR) 3.23 (95% CI,1.39-7.52) P < 0.01, aOR 2.556 (95% CI,1.30-5.02) P < 0.01, aOR 2.20 (95% CI,1.35-3.61) P < 0.001, aOR 1.051(95% CI,1.02-1.08) P < 0.001 respectively, but not carbapenems use aOR 1.052 (95% CI,0.657-1.685). CONCLUSIONS: The use of carbapenems were not associated with higher risk to developed superinfection. The most important risk factors associated with superinfection were presence of tracheostomy, endotracheal mechanical ventilation, Foley catheter and the duration of antibiotics.