Clinical and epidemiological factors causing longer SARS-CoV 2 viral shedding: the results from the CoviCamp cohort.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to investigate how long hospitalized patients stayed positive to the nasopharyngeal swab, and what demographic and clinical factors influence the time-to-negative swab. METHODS: We enrolled in a multicenter, observational, retrospective study involving 17 COVID-19 units in eight cities of the Campania, southern Italy all patients hospitalized from March 2020 to May 2021 diagnosed with Severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome-Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection for whom time-to-negative swab was available. RESULTS: 963 patients were enrolled. We defined three groups considering time-to-negative swab: the first including patients with time-to-negative swab before the 26th day, the second including patients with time-to-negative swab from day 26 to day 39, and the third including patients with time-to-negative swab > 39 days. 721 (74.9%) patients belonged to the first group, 194 (20.1%) to the second, and 52 (5.4%) belonged to the third group. Belonging to group 2 and 3 seemed to be influenced by age (p value < 0.001), Charlson comorbidity index (p = 0.009), arterial hypertension (p = 0.02), cardiovascular disease (p = 0.017), or chronic kidney disease (CKD) (p = 0.001). The multivariable analysis confers a leading role to CKD, with an odds ratio of 2.3 as factor influencing belonging to the groups showing a longer time-to-negative swab. Patients with CKD and diabetes were more frequently in the third group. DISCUSSION: Our analysis showed that CKD is a factor related to longer time-to-negative swab, probably because of immunosuppression related to this condition.

The impact of a non-restrictive Antimicrobial Stewardship Program in the emergency department of a secondary-level Italian hospital.

Evidence supporting the effectiveness of Antimicrobial Stewardship (AMS) Programs in the emergency department (ED) setting is limited. We conducted a prospective cohort study to assess the efficacy of an AMS program in an ED and a short-stay observation unit. The intervention included periodic prospective audits (twice a week), conducted by four infectious disease consultants. Primary outcomes included the difference in the hospital mortality rate, antibiotic consumption, and the incidence of bloodstream infections (BSI) caused by multidrug resistant (MDR) bacteria, before March 2020-February 2021 and after March 2021-February 2022 when the program was implemented. Interrupted time-series analysis was performed to assess the effect of our program. During the 12-month program, we performed 152 audits and evaluated 366 antibiotic therapies out of a total of 853 patients admitted. In the intervention period, we observed a non-statistically significant decrease in total antibiotic consumption, with a change in level of - 31.2 defined daily dose/100 patient-days (PD) (p = 0.71). Likewise, we found no significant variations in the rate of BSI due to MDR Gram-positive (CT - 0.02 events/PD, p = 0.84), MDR Gram-negative bacteria (CT 0.08, p = 0.71), or Candida spp. (CT 0.008, p = 0.86). Conversely, we found a significant decrease in the mortality rate between the pre- and post-intervention periods (- 1.98 deaths/100 PD, CI - 3.9 to - 0.007, p = 0.049). The Antibiotic Stewardship Program in the ED was associated with a significant decrease in the mortality rate. More high-quality studies are needed to determine the most effective ASP strategies in this unique setting.

Prognostic Value of Creatinine Levels at Admission on Disease Progression and Mortality in Patients with COVID-19-An Observational Retrospective Study.

INTRODUCTION: Acute kidney disease and chronic kidney disease are considered conditions that can increase the mortality and severity of COVID-19. However, few studies have investigated the impact of creatinine levels on COVID-19 progression in patients without a history of chronic kidney disease. The aim of the study was to assess the impact of creatinine levels at hospital admission on COVID-19 progression and mortality. METHODS: We performed a multicenter, observational, retrospective study involving seventeen COVID-19 Units in the Campania region in southern Italy. All adult (≥18 years) patients, hospitalized with a diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by a positive reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction on a naso-oropharyngeal swab, from 28 February 2020 to 31 May 2021, were enrolled in the CoviCamp cohort. RESULTS: Evaluating inclusion/exclusion criteria, 1357 patients were included. Considering in-hospital mortality and creatinine value at admission, the best cut-off point to discriminate a death during hospitalization was 1.115 mg/dL. The logistic regression demonstrated that factors independently associated with mortality were age (OR 1.082, CI: 1.054-1.110), Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) (OR 1.341, CI: 1.178-1.526), and an abnormal creatinine value at admission, defined as equal to or above 1.12 mg/dL (OR 2.233, CI: 1.373-3.634). DISCUSSION: In conclusion, our study is in line with previous studies confirming that the creatinine serum level can predict mortality in COVID-19 patients and defining that the best cut-off of the creatinine serum level at admission to predict mortality was 1.12 mg/dL.

Prevalence and Epidemiological and Clinical Features of Bacterial Infections in a Large Cohort of Patients Hospitalized for COVID-19 in Southern Italy: A Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of bacterial infections and antimicrobial prescriptions in a large cohort of COVID-19 patients and to identify the independent predictors of infection and antibiotic prescription. METHODS: All consecutive patients hospitalized for COVID-19 from March 2020 to May 2021 at 1 of the 17 centers participating in the study were included. All subjects showing a clinical presentation consistent with a bacterial infection with microbiological confirmation (documented infection), and/or a procalcitonin value >1 ng/mL (suspected infection) were considered as having a coinfection (if present at admission) or a superinfection (if acquired after at least 48 h of hospital stay). RESULTS: During the study period, of the 1993 patients, 42 (2.1%) presented with a microbiologically documented infection, including 17 coinfections and 25 superinfections, and 267 (13.2%) a suspected infection. A total of 478 subjects (24.5%) received an antibacterial treatment other than macrolides. No independent predictors of confirmed or suspected bacterial infection were identified. On the contrary, being hospitalized during the second wave of the pandemic (OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.18-1.97, p = 0.001), having a SOFA score ≥3 (OR 2.05, 95% CI 1.53-2.75, p < 0.001), a severe or critical disease (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.24-2.23, p < 0.001), and a high white blood cell count (OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.004-1.06, p = 0.023) were all independently related to having received an antimicrobial prescription. CONCLUSIONS: Our study reported a high rate of antimicrobial prescriptions despite a limited number of documented or suspected bacterial infections among the large cohort of hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Lung ultrasound-guided PEEP titration in COVID-19 patients treated with CPAP.

OBJECTIVES: An increasing number of COVID-19 patients were treated with continuous positive airways pressure (CPAP). To evaluate the clinical effects of personalized positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) compared to standard fixed PEEP in COVID-19 patients requiring CPAP. METHODS: This is a single center, prospective, randomized clinical study. Sixty-three COVID-19 patients with hypoxemic respiratory failure and bilateral pneumonia were randomized in two Groups: Group A received CPAP with fixed PEEP of 10 cm H2O, Group B performed the "PEEP trial", that consists in the evaluation of best PEEP defined as the PEEP value that precedes the echographic appearance of "lung pulse" determining a PaO2/FiO2 increase. Primary outcome was composite in-hospital mortality + intubation, secondary outcome was the percentage increase of PaO2/FiO2. As safety indicator, the incidence of pneumothorax was collected. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients were enrolled in Group A and 31 in Group B. The two groups were comparable for clinical characteristics and laboratory parameters. The primary outcome occurred in 36 (57.1 %) patients: 23 (71.8 %) in Group A and 13 (41.9 %) in Group B (p<0.01). Mortality was higher in Group A (53.1 vs. 19.3 %, p<0.01), while intubation rate was comparable between groups. Group B showed a higher PaO2/FiO2 increase than Group A (34.9 vs. 13.1 %, p<0.01). Five cases of pneumothorax were reported in Group A, none in Group B. CONCLUSIONS: Lung ultrasound-guided PEEP trial is associated with lower mortality in COVID-19 patients treated with CPAP. Identifying the best PEEP is useful to increase oxygenation and reduce the incidence of complications.

Pre-existing chronic kidney disease (CDK) was not associated with a severe clinical outcome of hospitalized COVID-19: results of a case-control study in Southern Italy.

The presence of co-morbidities is associated with a poor outcome in patients with COVID-19. The aim of the present study was to investigate the outcomes of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection and chronic kidney disease (CKD) in order to assess its impact on mortality and severity of disease. We performed a multicenter, observational, 1:2 matched case-control study involving seventeen COVID-19 Units in southern Italy. All the adults hospitalized for SARS-CoV-2 infection and with pre-existing CKD were included (Cases). For each Case, two patients without CKD pair matched for gender, age (+5 years), and number of co-morbidities (excluding CKD) were enrolled (Controls). Of the 2,005 patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection followed during the study period, 146 patients with CKD and 292 patients without were enrolled in the case and control groups, respectively. Between the Case and Control groups, there were no statistically significant differences in the prevalence of moderate (17.1% vs 17.8%, p=0.27) or severe (18.8% and 13.7%, p=0.27) clinical presentation of COVID-19 or deaths (20.9% vs 28.1%, p=0.27). In the Case group, the patients dead during hospitalization were statistically higher in the 89 patients with CKD stage 4-5 compared to 45 patients with stages 1-3 CKD (30.3% vs 13.3%, p=0.03). Our data suggests that only CKD stage 4-5 on admission was associated with an increased risk of in-hospital death.

More Severe COVID-19 in Patients With Active Cancer: Results of a Multicenter Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to compare coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) severity presentation between oncologic and non-oncologic patients and to evaluate the impact of cancer type and stage on COVID-19 course. METHODS: We performed a multicentre, retrospective study involving 13 COVID-19 Units in Campania region from February to May 2020. We defined as severe COVID-19 presentation the cases that required mechanical ventilation and/or admission to Intensive Care Units (ICU) and/or in case of death. RESULTS: We enrolled 371 COVID-19 patients, of whom 34 (9.2%) had a history or a diagnosis of cancer (24 solid, 6 onco-hematological). Oncologic patients were older (p<0.001), had more comorbidities (p<0.001) and showed a higher rate of severe COVID-19 presentation (p=0.001) and of death (p<0.001). Compared to 12 patients with non-active cancer and to 337 without cancer, the 17 patients with active cancer had more comorbidities and showed a higher rate of severe COVID-19 and of mortality (all p values <0.001). Compared to the 281 non-severe patients, the 90 subjects with a severe presentation of COVID-19 were older (p<0.01), with more comorbidities (p<0.001) and with a higher rate of cancer (p=0.001). At multivariate analysis, age (OR 1.08, 95% CI: 1.04-1.11) and suffering from cancer in an active stage (OR 5.33, 95% CI: 1.77-16.53) were independently associated with severe COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Since the higher risk of severe evolution of COVID-19, cancer patients, especially those with an active malignancy, should be candidates for early evaluation of symptoms and early treatment for COVID-19.

Time-weighted lactate as a predictor of adverse outcome in acute heart failure.

AIMS: The role of dynamic changes in lactate concentrations on prognosis in acute heart failure has been poorly investigated. The aim of this study was to explore the predictive value of 24 h time-weighted lactate (LACTW ) in patients with acute heart failure. METHODS AND RESULTS: Ninety-six consecutive acute heart failure patients presenting to the Emergency Department of San Paolo Hospital, Naples, Italy, were prospectively enrolled. Arterial blood lactate was measured at admission and during the following 24 h at random time intervals. LACTW was obtained by the sum of the average lactate values among consecutive time points multiplied by the intervals between consecutive time points and dividing the sum by the total time (24 h). The outcome was a composite of need of admission to the intensive care unit, hospitalization duration >7 days, or intra-hospital death. Admission lactate, maximum measured lactate, and LACTW were collected. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis was applied to determine the hazard ratio (HR) of developing the outcome. Forty-three patients experienced the pre-specified outcome. In sex-adjusted and age-adjusted multivariable analysis, LACTW predicted the outcome occurrence (HR: 1.51, 95% confidence interval: 1.24, 1.84, P < 0.001). Risk stratification analysis based on LACTW tertiles demonstrated a gradual increase in risk of developing the outcome (HR: 17.32, 95% confidence interval: 2.30, 130.23, P = 0.006) for the highest LACTW tertile. CONCLUSIONS: In acute heart failure patients, 24 h LACTW had a significant independent predictive value for adverse intra-hospital outcome. LACTW could be a useful index at identifying high-risk patients who may require a more aggressive treatment during hospitalization.

Lung ultrasound as diagnostic tool for SARS-CoV-2 infection.

The aim of this study was to explore the role of lung ultrasound (LUS) in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection and to verify its utility in the prediction of lung disease's severity and outcome. Fifty-three consecutive patients presenting to the Emergency Department of Santa Maria delle Grazie Hospital with high suspicion of SARS-CoV-2 infection underwent diagnostic test for SARS-CoV-2 on samples obtained from nasopharyngeal swab as well as complete proper diagnostic work-up that included clinical evaluation, laboratory tests, blood gas analyses, chest CT and LUS. A semiquantitative analysis of B-lines distribution was performed to calculate the LUS score. Patients were divided into two groups according to the results of both SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic test and other exams (Group A = pneumonia due to SARS-CoV2 infection vs Group B = no SARS-CoV2 infection and another definite diagnosis). LUS showed an excellent accuracy in predicting the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection (area under the ROC curve of 0.92 with a sensibility of 73% and a specificity of 89% a the cut-off of 12.5). LUS score was more impaired in SARS-CoV-2 patients (18.1 ± 6.0 vs 7.6 ± 5.9, p < 0.00001) and it is significantly negatively correlated with PF ratio values (r = - 0.719, p < 0.0001). An intrahospital mortality rate of 46% was found; patients with adverse outcome had significant higher value of LUS, PF, LDH, and APACHE II score. None of these parameters was predictive of mortality. LUS is a useful tool for the early detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection and for the evaluation of the disease severity, but does not predict mortality. Further studies with repeated evaluations of LUS score are needed to further explore the role of LUS in the assessment of severity in SARS-CoV-2 disease and in the monitoring of the response to treatments.

The use of chest ultrasonography in suspected cases of COVID-19 in the emergency department.

AIM: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus-specific reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) represents the diagnostic gold standard. We explored the value of chest ultrasonography to predict positivity to SARS-CoV-2 on RT-PCR in suspected COVID-19 cases. PATIENTS & METHODS: Consecutive patients with suspect COVID-19 were included if they had fever and/or history of cough and/or dyspnea. Lung ultrasound score (LUSS) was computed according to published methods. RESULTS: A total of 76 patients were included. A 3-variable model based on aspartate transaminase (AST) > upper limit of normal, LUSS >12 and body temperature >37.5°C yielded an overall accuracy of 91%. CONCLUSION: A simple LUSS-based model may represent a powerful tool for initial assessment in suspected cases of COVID-19.