RESUMO
Background: Third wave of COVID-19 has affected several countries. Case fatality rates from first and second waves are expected to be surpassed by the current wave due to various variant transmissions. This study was aimed to compare and contrast the significant clinical markers between survivors and non-survivors during the third wave of COVID-19 to assess severity and prognosis. Methods: It includes all the patients who were diagnosed with COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) during the third wave, and were monitored for their disease course and outcomes. A total of 209 patients were included in the analysis via non-probability consecutive sampling method. Results: The median age was higher in non-surviving patients (p = 0.010). Majority of deaths occurred in intensive care patients (p < 0.001) and those with diabetes (p = 0.032) and hypertension (p = 0.003). Fever was the most predominant symptom in all patients (78.9%), dyspnea was common among expired individuals (p = 0.043) while recovered patients were more likely to be asymptomatic (p = 0.044). Gastrointestinal symptoms were not found marked during this wave. Being on ventilator has higher mortality (p < 0.001). Predominant radiological findings were interstitial patches or infiltrate (43.7%). Multivariable analysis showed hypertension (p = 0.042), BiPAP/CPAP (p < 0.001), being on ventilator (p = 0.004), and ARDS (p < 0.001) was associated with poor survival while patchy interstitial infiltrates on X-ray had good survival probability (p = 0.032). On Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, hypertension (p = 0.003), BiPAP/CPAP (p = 0.008), ventilator (p = 0.025), ICU stay (p = 0.001), high-grade fever (p = 0.001), and ARDS (p < 0.001) had reduced cumulative survival. Conclusion: Certain biochemical markers were more predictive of disease severity in the third-wave than the preceding waves.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: COVID-19 is a global pandemic. In our study, we aimed to utilize the hematological parameters in predicting the prognosis and mortality in COVID-19 patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective, observational study was conducted to include all the admitted patients (n = 191) having COVID-19 Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) positive, and evaluated those for prognosis and disease outcome by utilizing several biochemical and hematological markers. RESULTS: Amongst the patients admitted in the ward versus in the intensive care unit (ICU), there were significant differences in mean hemoglobin (P = 0.003), total leukocyte count (P = 0.001), absolute neutrophil and lymphocyte counts (P < 0.001), absolute monocyte count (P = 0.019), Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and Lymphocyte-to-Monocyte ratio (LMR) (P < 0.001), Platelet-to-Lymphocyte ratio (PLR) and Lymphocyte-to C-reactive protein ratio (LCR) (P = 0.002), and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels (P < 0.001). Amongst the deceased patients, there was significant leukocytosis (P = 0.008), neutrophilia and lymphopenia (P < 0.001), increased NLR (P = 0.001), decreased LMR (P < 0.001), increased PLR (p = 0.017), decreased LCR (p = 0.003), and elevated CRP level (P < 0.001). A receiver operating characteristic curve obtained for the above parameters showed NLR (AUC: 0.841, PPV: 83.6%) and PLR (AUC: 0.703, PPV: 81.8%) for ICU patients, while NLR (AUC: 0.860, PPV: 91.1%) and PLR (AUC: 0.677, PPV: 87.5%) for the deceased patients had significant accuracy for predicting the disease severity of COVID-19 in comparison to survivors. CONCLUSION: The inflammatory markers and hematological indices are a good guide for predicting the severity and disease outcome of coronavirus disease. NLR and PLR are elevated in severe disease while LMR and LCR are inversely correlating with disease severity.
RESUMO
[This corrects the article DOI: 10.7759/cureus.8712.].
RESUMO
Background and objective COVID-19 is a highly disseminating viral disease imparted by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV-2), which was declared a global pandemic by the World Health Organization. In our study, we aimed to describe the clinical characteristics of the first 100 hospitalized patients of confirmed COVID-19 in a developing country. Materials and methods The study included all the admitted patients (n = 100) having COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) positive, and evaluated clinical profiles and characteristics of the patients linking to disease severity. Results Out of the 100 patients, 67 were in the ward, 33 were in ICU, 78 of them recovered, while 22 deaths reported. The mean age was 52.58 ± 15.68, with most frequent comorbidities are diabetes and hypertension while frequent symptoms are fever and dry cough. Bilateral lower zone patchy infiltrates are frequent chest radiographic findings. Amongst the patients admitted in ICU, there were significant differences in the total leukocyte count (P = 0.001), neutrophils and lymphocytes (P =< 0.001), monocytes (P = 0.027), urea (P =< 0.001), creatinine (P = 0.002), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) increasing with disease severity, lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR) and lymphocyte-to-C-reactive protein ratio (LCR) decreasing with mortalities. Gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT) followed by aspartate aminotransferase (AST) are frequent hepatic derangements, while C-reactive protein (CRP) levels predicting ICU admission with area under the curve (AUC): 0.806, positive predictive value (PPV): 85.1% and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) predicting mortality with AUC: 0.877, PPV: 97.3%, while NLR (AUC: 0.806, PPV: 95.8%) for mortality and neutrophils (AUC: 0.773, PPV: 87.5%) for ICU patients. Conclusion A number of factors are linked with disease severity and mortality along with dynamic changes of the laboratory investigations during hospital stay affecting prognosis.
RESUMO
Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has been associated with many neurological symptoms but there is a little evidence-based published material on the neurological manifestations of COVID-19. The purpose of this article is to review the spectrum of the various neurological manifestations and underlying associated pathophysiology in COVID-19 patients. Method: We conducted a review of the various case reports and retrospective clinical studies published on the neurological manifestations, associated literature, and related pathophysiology of COVID-19 using PUBMED and subsequent proceedings. A total of 118 articles were thoroughly reviewed in order to highlight the plausible spectrum of neurological manifestations of COVID 19. Every article was either based on descriptive analysis, clinical scenarios, correspondence, and editorials emphasizing the neurological manifestations either directly or indirectly. We then tried to highlight the significant plausible manifestations and complications that could be related to the pandemic. With little known about the dynamics and the presentation spectrum of the virus apart from the respiratory symptoms, this area needs further consideration. Conclusion: The neurological manifestations associated with COVID-19 such as Encephalitis, Meningitis, acute cerebrovascular disease, and Guillain Barré Syndrome (GBS) are of great concern. But in the presence of life-threatening abnormal vitals in severely ill COVID-19 patients, these are not usually underscored. There is a need to diagnose these manifestations at the earliest to limit long term sequelae. Much research is needed to explore the role of SARS-CoV-2 in causing these neurological manifestations by isolating it either from cerebrospinal fluid or brain tissues of the deceased on autopsy. We also recommend exploring the risk factors that lead to the development of these neurological manifestations.
RESUMO
Background and objectives Stone in the biliary tract is one of the most common causes of hospitalization. However, it is difficult to determine the prevalence of gallstones in the general population because they are often asymptomatic. Thus, management lies in the proper clearance of the common bile duct (CBD) along with the removal of the gallbladder, for which it must be diagnosed on time with proper accuracy. Imaging modalities including magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP), endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) provide true visualization of choledocholithiasis with comparable sensitivities. The gold standard ERCP is an invasive procedure and may cause complications, such as pancreatitis, perforation, and bleeding. EUS is a minimally invasive procedure to assess the biliary tract using high-frequency sound waves. Until now the EUS has not been addressed much in our local tertiary care setups and this study was conducted to evaluate its accuracy in the diagnosis of choledocholithiasis. The objective of our study is to determine the diagnostic accuracy (specificity and sensitivity) of EUS versus ERCP for the diagnosis of choledocholithiasis. Materials and methods This retrospective study was conducted on patients suspected of having choledocholithiasis undergoing both EUS and ERCP based on their history, clinical symptoms, and laboratory test results including upper abdominal pain, deranged liver function enzymes, and a dilated CBD on radiology. EUS was initially performed for the diagnosis of extrahepatic biliary obstruction followed by one or more of the confirmatory criterion standard tests (including ERCP). In order to reduce the chances of passage of stone resulting in negative analysis, only those patients were included in which both procedures were conducted temporally close together (24-72 hours in most instances). The main outcome measures were diagnostic accuracy with the help of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) using a receiver operating characteristic curve. A total of 123 patients met the inclusion criteria via non-probability consecutive sampling methods. Results The mean age of our study population was 50.30 ± 13.91. We included 63 males (51.2%) and 60 females (48.8%). The most frequent indication for undergoing diagnostic procedures was deranged liver function tests (67.47%). The frequent comorbidities reported were hypertension (29.26%), diabetes (21.95%), chronic liver disease (16.26%), and ischemic heart disease (4.87%). Mean alkaline phosphatase and gamma-glutamyl transferase levels were markedly raised from the baseline in the study population. Post-ERCP complications were also reported in some of the study participants. About 85 patients (69.10%) were diagnosed with choledocholithiasis among the study participants. The diagnostic accuracy of EUS was compared with ERCP revealed an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.930, standard error of 0.031, 95% confidence interval of 0.868-0.991, the sensitivity of 89.5%, specificity of 96.5%, positive predictive value of 91.9%, and negative predictive value of 95.3%. Conclusion It is recommended that ERCP can be selectively conducted or excluded in patients with biliary obstruction in case of EUS negative, thus minimizing the complications and morbidity associated with an invasive procedure, with our results showing a comparative diagnostic accuracy of EUS.