A Case-Control of Patients with COVID-19 to Explore the Association of Previous Hospitalisation Use of Medication on the Mortality of COVID-19 Disease: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis.

Data from several cohorts of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) suggest that the most common comorbidities for severe COVID-19 disease are the elderly, high blood pressure, and diabetes; however, it is not currently known whether the previous use of certain drugs help or hinder recovery. This study aims to explore the association of previous hospitalisation use of medication on the mortality of COVID-19 disease. A retrospective case-control from two hospitals in Madrid, Spain, included all patients aged 18 years or above hospitalised with a diagnosis of COVID-19. A Propensity Score matching (PSM) analysis was performed. Confounding variables were considered to be age, sex, and the number of comorbidities. Finally, 3712 patients were included. Of these, 687 (18.5%) patients died (cases). The 22,446 medicine trademarks used previous to admission were classified according to the ATC, obtaining 689 final drugs; all of them were included in PSM analysis. Eleven drugs displayed a reduction in mortality: azithromycin, bemiparine, budesonide-formoterol fumarate, cefuroxime, colchicine, enoxaparin, ipratropium bromide, loratadine, mepyramine theophylline acetate, oral rehydration salts, and salbutamol sulphate. Eight final drugs displayed an increase in mortality: acetylsalicylic acid, digoxin, folic acid, mirtazapine, linagliptin, enalapril, atorvastatin, and allopurinol. Medication associated with survival (anticoagulants, antihistamines, azithromycin, bronchodilators, cefuroxime, colchicine, and inhaled corticosteroids) may be candidates for future clinical trials. Drugs associated with mortality show an interaction with the underlying conditions.

Proctologic emergency consultation during COVID-19: Comparative cross-sectional cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Proctologic issues entail a frequent reason for consultation in the emergency department (ED). We aim to analyze how the SARS-COV-2 pandemic has impacted in the demand for proctological consultations. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Descriptive comparative retrospective study of cross-sectional cohorts of patients attending the ED for proctological complaints from March to April in 2020 and 2019. Demographic variables, comorbidities, reasons for consultation and diagnosis, treatment and readmission were included. Four periods were analyzed according to the different stages of the pandemic derived limitations. RESULTS: A total of 191 patients were reviewed, 58 in 2020 and 133 in 2019 with an average age of 48 years (SD 20.1) and 112 (58.6%) males. The average number of daily consultations was 2.18 patients in 2019 versus 0.95 in 2020 (p=0.025) meaning a 56% reduction in consultations for proctological reasons. This difference in average consultations was significant in both periods of lockout (p=0.001) and previous de-escalation (p=0.014). The diagnosis distribution was similar between both periods; however, perianal abscesses doubled their rate in 2020, 22.4% versus 11.3% (p=0.045). There was an increasing need for surgery, 31% vs 15% (p=0.011) with no difference in outpatients regimen after emergency surgery (12.5% vs 7.5%, p=0.201). Three patients in 2020 required readmission to the ED (5.2% vs 12.9%, p=0.086). CONCLUSION: There was a decrease of a 56% in proctologic emergency consultation, however, the need for surgery was twice more frequent during the study period. Reflection on the use of emergencies for proctological reasons is warranted.

Proctologic emergency consultation during COVID-19: Comparative cross-sectional cohort study / Proctología urgente en tiempos de COVID-19: estudio comparativo de cohortes ¿cómo justificar este cambio?

Introduction: Proctologic issues entail a frequent reason for consultation in the emergency department (ED). We aim to analyze how the SARS-COV-2 pandemic has impacted in the demand for proctological consultations. Material and method: Descriptive comparative retrospective study of cross-sectional cohorts of patients attending the ED for proctological complaints from March to April in 2020 and 2019. Demographic variables, comorbidities, reasons for consultation and diagnosis, treatment and readmission were included. Four periods were analyzed according to the different stages of the pandemic derived limitations. Results: A total of 191 patients were reviewed, 58 in 2020 and 133 in 2019 with an average age of 48 years (SD 20.1) and 112 (58.6%) males. The average number of daily consultations was 2.18 patients in 2019 versus 0.95 in 2020 (p=0.025) meaning a 56% reduction in consultations for proctological reasons. This difference in average consultations was significant in both periods of lockout (p=0.001) and previous de-escalation (p=0.014). The diagnosis distribution was similar between both periods; however, perianal abscesses doubled their rate in 2020, 22.4% versus 11.3% (p=0.045). There was an increasing need for surgery, 31% vs 15% (p=0.011) with no difference in outpatients regimen after emergency surgery (12.5% vs 7.5%, p=0.201). Three patients in 2020 required readmission to the ED (5.2% vs 12.9%, p=0.086). Conclusion: There was a decrease of a 56% in proctologic emergency consultation, however, the need for surgery was twice more frequent during the study period. Reflection on the use of emergencies for proctological reasons is warranted. (AU)

Introducción: La enfermedad proctológica supone un motivo de consulta frecuente en los servicios de urgencia. Nuestro objetivo es analizar como la pandemia por SARS-CoV-2 ha impactado en la demanda de consultas proctológicas. Material y método: Estudio comparativo retrospectivo de cohortes transversales en el periodo de marzo y abril de 2020 y 2019 de las consultas urgentes por motivos proctológicos. Se incluyeron variables demográficas, antecedentes, motivo de consulta y diagnóstico, tratamiento y readmisión. Se analizaron 4 periodos en función de las distintas etapas del estado de alarma. Resultados: Se atendieron 191 pacientes, 58 en 2020 y 133 en 2019, con una edad media de 48 años, siendo 112 (58,6%) varones. La media de consultas diarias fue de 2,18 pacientes en 2019 frente a 0,95 en 2020 (p=0,025) suponiendo una reducción del 56%. Esta diferencia fue significativa en ambos periodos de confinamiento (p=0,001) y en la desescalada (p=0,014). La distribución de los motivos de consulta fue similar, sin embargo, los abscesos perianales duplicaron su tasa en 2020, 22,4 frente al 11,3% (p=0,045). Se observó un incremento de la necesidad de cirugía, 31 frente al 15% (p=0,011) sin diferencias en el manejo ambulatorio tras cirugía urgente (12,5 frente al 7,5%; p=0,201). Hubo 3 pacientes en 2020 que requirieron readmisión en urgencias (5,2 frente al 12,9%; p=0,086). Conclusiones: El número de consultas por enfermedad proctológica urgente ha sufrido una reducción del 56%, sin embargo, las enfermedades que requieren tratamiento quirúrgico se han duplicado en proporción. La reflexión sobre el uso de urgencias por motivos proctológicos es necesaria. (AU)

Usefulness of the CONUT index upon hospital admission as a potential prognostic indicator of COVID-19 health outcomes.

BACKGROUND: In-hospital mortality in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is high. Simple prognostic indices are needed to identify patients at high-risk of COVID-19 health outcomes. We aimed to determine the usefulness of the CONtrolling NUTritional status (CONUT) index as a potential prognostic indicator of mortality in COVID-19 patients upon hospital admission. METHODS: Our study design is of a retrospective observational study in a large cohort of COVID-19 patients. In addition to descriptive statistics, a Kaplan-Meier mortality analysis and a Cox regression were performed, as well as receiver operating curve (ROC). RESULTS: From February 5, 2020 to January 21, 2021, there was a total of 2969 admissions for COVID-19 at our hospital, corresponding to 2844 patients. Overall, baseline (within 4 days of admission) CONUT index could be scored for 1627 (57.2%) patients. Patients' age was 67.3 ±â€Š16.5 years and 44.9% were women. The CONUT severity distribution was: 194 (11.9%) normal (0-1); 769 (47.2%) light (2-4); 585 (35.9%) moderate (5-8); and 79 (4.9%) severe (9-12). Mortality of 30 days after admission was 3.1% in patients with normal risk CONUT, 9.0% light, 22.7% moderate, and 40.5% in those with severe CONUT (P < 0.05). An increased risk of death associated with a greater baseline CONUT stage was sustained in a multivariable Cox regression model (P < 0.05). An increasing baseline CONUT stage was associated with a longer duration of admission, a greater requirement for the use of non-invasive and invasive mechanical ventilation, and other clinical outcomes (all P < 0.05). The ROC of CONUT for mortality had an area under the curve (AUC) and 95% confidence interval of 0.711 (0.676-0746). CONCLUSION: The CONUT index upon admission is potentially a reliable and independent prognostic indicator of mortality and length of hospitalization in COVID-19 patients.

Proctologic emergency consultation during COVID-19: Comparative cross-sectional cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Proctologic issues entail a frequent reason for consultation in the emergency department (ED). We aim to analyze how the SARS-COV-2 pandemic has impacted in the demand for proctological consultations. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Descriptive comparative retrospective study of cross-sectional cohorts of patients attending the ED for proctological complaints from March to April in 2020 and 2019. Demographic variables, comorbidities, reasons for consultation and diagnosis, treatment and readmission were included. Four periods were analyzed according to the different stages of the pandemic derived limitations. RESULTS: A total of 191 patients were reviewed, 58 in 2020 and 133 in 2019 with an average age of 48 years (SD 20.1) and 112 (58.6%) males. The average number of daily consultations was 2.18 patients in 2019 versus 0.95 in 2020 (p=0.025) meaning a 56% reduction in consultations for proctological reasons. This difference in average consultations was significant in both periods of lockout (p=0.001) and previous de-escalation (p=0.014). The diagnosis distribution was similar between both periods; however, perianal abscesses doubled their rate in 2020, 22.4% versus 11.3% (p=0.045). There was an increasing need for surgery, 31% vs 15% (p=0.011) with no difference in outpatients regimen after emergency surgery (12.5% vs 7.5%, p=0.201). Three patients in 2020 required readmission to the ED (5.2% vs 12.9%, p=0.086). CONCLUSION: There was a decrease of a 56% in proctologic emergency consultation, however, the need for surgery was twice more frequent during the study period. Reflection on the use of emergencies for proctological reasons is warranted.

Proctologic emergency consultation during COVID-19: Comparative cross-sectional cohort study / Proctología urgente en tiempos de COVID-19: estudio comparativo de cohortes ¿cómo justificar este cambio?

INTRODUCTION: Proctologic issues entail a frequent reason for consultation in the emergency department (ED). We aim to analyze how the SARS-COV-2 pandemic has impacted in the demand for proctological consultations. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Descriptive comparative retrospective study of cross-sectional cohorts of patients attending the ED for proctological complaints from March to April in 2020 and 2019. Demographic variables, comorbidities, reasons for consultation and diagnosis, treatment and readmission were included. Four periods were analyzed according to the different stages of the pandemic derived limitations. RESULTS: A total of 191 patients were reviewed, 58 in 2020 and 133 in 2019 with an average age of 48 years (SD 20.1) and 112 (58.6%) males. The average number of daily consultations was 2.18 patients in 2019 versus 0.95 in 2020 (p = 0.025) meaning a 56% reduction in consultations for proctological reasons. This difference in average consultations was significant in both periods of lockout (p = 0.001) and previous de-escalation (p = 0.014). The diagnosis distribution was similar between both periods; however, perianal abscesses doubled their rate in 2020, 22.4% versus 11.3% (p = 0.045). There was an increasing need for surgery, 31% vs 15% (p = 0.011) with no difference in outpatients regimen after emergency surgery (12.5% vs 7.5%, p = 0.201). Three patients in 2020 required readmission to the ED (5.2% vs 12.9%, p = 0.086). CONCLUSION: There was a decrease of a 56% in proctologic emergency consultation, however, the need for surgery was twice more frequent during the study period. Reflection on the use of emergencies for proctological reasons is warranted

INTRODUCCIÓN: La enfermedad proctológica supone un motivo de consulta frecuente en los servicios de urgencia. Nuestro objetivo es analizar como la pandemia por SARS-CoV-2 ha impactado en la demanda de consultas proctológicas. MATERIAL Y MÉTODO: Estudio comparativo retrospectivo de cohortes transversales en el periodo de marzo y abril de 2020 y 2019 de las consultas urgentes por motivos proctológicos. Se incluyeron variables demográficas, antecedentes, motivo de consulta y diagnóstico, tratamiento y readmisión. Se analizaron 4 periodos en función de las distintas etapas del estado de alarma. RESULTADOS: Se atendieron 191 pacientes, 58 en 2020 y 133 en 2019, con una edad media de 48 años, siendo 112 (58,6%) varones. La media de consultas diarias fue de 2,18 pacientes en 2019 frente a 0,95 en 2020 (p = 0,025) suponiendo una reducción del 56%. Esta diferencia fue significativa en ambos periodos de confinamiento (p = 0,001) y en la desescalada (p = 0,014). La distribución de los motivos de consulta fue similar, sin embargo, los abscesos perianales duplicaron su tasa en 2020, 22,4 frente al 11,3% (p = 0,045). Se observó un incremento de la necesidad de cirugía, 31 frente al 15% (p = 0,011) sin diferencias en el manejo ambulatorio tras cirugía urgente (12,5 frente al 7,5%; p = 0,201). Hubo 3 pacientes en 2020 que requirieron readmisión en urgencias (5,2 frente al 12,9%; p = 0,086). CONCLUSIONES: El número de consultas por enfermedad proctológica urgente ha sufrido una reducción del 56%, sin embargo, las enfermedades que requieren tratamiento quirúrgico se han duplicado en proporción. La reflexión sobre el uso de urgencias por motivos proctológicos es necesaria

Launch and preliminary analysis of Hospital de La Princesa's inter-specialists biological therapies unit / Lanzamiento y análisis preliminar de la Unidad de Terapias Biológicas interespecialistas del Hospital de La Princesa

We herein describe an inter-specialists unit for the monitoring and management of biological therapies and analyze the utilization of biological agents across specialties and diseases. Protocols and therapeutic objectives, as well as outcomes and protocol deviations, are shared and discussed periodically between specialists. All patients treated at one centre with any biological treatment from January 2000 by rheumatology, gastroenterology, dermatology, or neurology, regardless diagnosis, are identified by Clinical Pharmacy and included in an ongoing database that detects use and outcome. The drugs, survival, and reasons for discontinuation differ significantly across specialties. This approach has helped us recognizing the challenges and size of the problem of sharing expensive medications across specialties, and has served as a starting point to contribute to the better use of these compounds

A continuación describimos una unidad interservicios para el seguimiento y la gestión de las terapias biológicas, y analizamos la utilización de los agentes biológicos en las distintas especialidades y enfermedades. Los protocolos y los objetivos terapéuticos, así como los resultados y las desviaciones de los protocolos, se comparten y debaten periódicamente entre los especialistas. Todos los pacientes tratados en el centro con cualquier terapia biológica desde enero de 2000 por reumatología, gastroenterología, dermatología o neurología, independientemente del diagnóstico, son identificados por Farmacia Clínica e incluidos en una base de datos continua, que detecta el uso y los resultados. Los medicamentos, la supervivencia y las razones de interrupción del tratamiento difieren significativamente entre especialidades. Este enfoque nos ha ayudado a reconocer los retos y la magnitud del problema de compartir medicamentos costosos entre especialidades, y ha servido como punto de partida para contribuir a un mejor uso de los mismos

Correction: Inflammation biomarkers in blood as mortality predictors in community-acquired pneumonia admitted patients: Importance of comparison with neutrophil count percentage or neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0173947.].

Launch and preliminary analysis of Hospital de La Princesa's inter-specialists biological therapies unit.

We herein describe an inter-specialists unit for the monitoring and management of biological therapies and analyze the utilization of biological agents across specialties and diseases. Protocols and therapeutic objectives, as well as outcomes and protocol deviations, are shared and discussed periodically between specialists. All patients treated at one centre with any biological treatment from January 2000 by rheumatology, gastroenterology, dermatology, or neurology, regardless diagnosis, are identified by Clinical Pharmacy and included in an ongoing database that detects use and outcome. The drugs, survival, and reasons for discontinuation differ significantly across specialties. This approach has helped us recognizing the challenges and size of the problem of sharing expensive medications across specialties, and has served as a starting point to contribute to the better use of these compounds.

Inflammation biomarkers in blood as mortality predictors in community-acquired pneumonia admitted patients: Importance of comparison with neutrophil count percentage or neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio.

INTRODUCTION: The increase and persistence of inflammation in community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) patients can lead to higher mortality. Biomarkers capable of measuring this inadequate inflammatory response are likely candidates to be related with a bad outcome. We investigated the association between concentrations of several inflammatory markers and mortality of CAP patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a prospective study of hospitalised CAP patients in a Spanish university hospital. Blood tests upon admittance and in the early-stage evolution (72-120 hours) were carried out, where C-reactive protein, procalcitonin, proadrenomedullin, copeptin, white blood cell, Lymphocyte Count Percentage (LCP), Neutrophil Count Percentage (NCP) and Neutrophil/Lymphocyte Ratio (NLR) were measured. The outcome variable was mortality at 30 and 90 days. Statistical analysis included logistic regression, ROC analysis and area-under-curve test. RESULTS: 154 hospitalised CAP patients were included. Patients who died during follow-up had higher levels of procalcitonin, copeptin, proadrenomedullin, lower levels of LCP, and higher of NCP and NLR. Remarkably, multivariate analysis showed a relationship between NCP and mortality, regardless of age, severity of CAP and comorbidities. AUC analysis showed that NLR and NCP at admittance and during early-stage evolution achieved a good diagnostic power. ROC test for NCP and NLR were similar to those of the novel serum biomarkers analysed. CONCLUSIONS: NLR and NCP, are promising candidate predictors of mortality for hospitalised CAP patients, and both are cheaper, easier to perform, and at least as reliable as the new serum biomarkers. Future implementation of new biomarkers would require comparison not only with classic inflammatory parameters like White Blood Cell count but also with NLR and NCP.

The incidence of cardiovascular events after hospitalization due to CAP and their association with different inflammatory markers.

BACKGROUND: Late prognosis of Community-Acquired Pneumonia (CAP) patients is related to cardiovascular events. Persistence of inflammation-related markers, defined by high circulatory levels of interleukin 6 and 10 (IL-6/IL-10), is associated with a higher post-event mortality rate for CAP patients. However, association between these markers and other components of the immune response, and the risk of cardiovascular events, has not been adequately explored. The main objectives of this study are: 1) to quantify the incidence of cardiovascular disease, in the year post-dating their hospital admittance due to CAP and, 2) to describe the distribution patterns of a wide spectrum of inflammatory markers upon admittance to and release from hospital, and to determine their relationship with the incidence of cardiovascular disease. METHODS/DESIGN: A cohort prospective study. All patients diagnosed and hospitalized with CAP will be candidates for inclusion. The study will take place in the Universitary Hospital La Princesa, Spain, during two years. Two samples of blood will be taken from each patient: the first upon admittance and the second one prior to release, in order to analyse various immune agents. The main determinants are: pro-adrenomedullin, copeptin, IL-1, IL-6, TNF-α, IL-17, IFN-γ, IL-10 and TGF-ß, E-Selectin, ICAM-1, VCAM-1 and subpopulations of peripheral T lymphocytes (T regulator, Th1 and Th17), together with other clinical and analytical variables. Follow up will start at admittance and finish a year after discharge, registering incidence of death and cardiovascular events. The main objective is to establish the predictive power of different inflammatory markers in the prognosis of CAP, in the short and long term, and their relationship with cardiovascular disease. DISCUSSION: The level of some inflammatory markers (IL-6/IL-10) has been proposed as a means to differentiate the degree of severity of CAP, but their association with cardiovascular risk is not well established. In this study we aim to define new inflammatory markers associated with cardiovascular disease that could be helpful for the prognosis of CAP patients, by describing the distribution of a wide spectrum of inflammatory mediators and analyzing their association with the incidence of cardiovascular disease and mortality one year after release from hospital.