RESUMO
AIM: To determine whether the duration of respiratory distress symptoms in severe COVID-19 pneumonia affects the need for invasive mechanical ventilation and clinical outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An observational multicentre cohort study of patients hospitalised in five COVID-19-designated ICUs of the University Hospitals of Emilia-Romagna Region. Patients included were adults with pneumonia due to SARS-CoV-2 with PaO2/FiO2 ratio <300 mmHg, respiratory distress symptoms, and need for mechanical ventilation (invasive or non-invasive). Exclusion criteria were an uncertain time of respiratory distress, end-of-life decision, and mechanical respiratory support before hospital admission. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We analysed 171 patients stratified into tertiles according to respiratory distress duration (distress time, DT) before application of mechanical ventilation support. The rate of patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation was significantly different (p < 0.001) among the tertiles: 17/57 patients in the shortest duration, 29/57 in the intermediate duration, and 40/57 in the longest duration. The respiratory distress time significantly increased the risk of invasive ventilation in the univariate analysis (OR 5.5 [CI 2.48-12.35], p = 0.003). Multivariable regression analysis confirmed this association (OR 10.7 [CI 2.89-39.41], p < 0.001). Clinical outcomes (mortality and hospital stay) did not show significant differences between DT tertiles. DISCUSSION: Albeit preliminary and retrospective, our data raised the hypothesis that the duration of respiratory distress symptoms may play a role in COVID-19 patients' need for invasive mechanical ventilation. Furthermore, our observations suggested that specific strategies may be directed towards identifying and managing early symptoms of respiratory distress, regardless of the levels of hypoxemia and the severity of the dyspnoea itself.
RESUMO
The optimal treatment for latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) in subjects exposed to multidrug-resistant (MDR) tuberculosis (TB) remains unclear, and the change in response of the QuantiFERON-TB Gold In-Tube (QTB-IT) test during and after treatment is unknown. Between May 2010 and August 2010, 39 prisoners at the 'Casa Circondariale' of Modena, Italy, were exposed to a patient with active pulmonary MDR TB. All contacts were tested with the tuberculin skin test and QTB-IT. Upon exclusion of active TB, subjects positive to both tests were offered 6 months' treatment with pyrazinamide (PZA) and levofloxacin (LVX). QTB-IT testing was repeated at 3 and 6 months after initial testing in all subjects who were offered LTBI treatment. Seventeen (43.5%) of 39 subjects tested positive to both tuberculin skin test and QTB-IT test, and 12 (70.5%) agreed to receive therapy with PZA and LVX at standard doses. Only five (41.6%) of 12 subjects completed 6 months' treatment. Reasons for discontinuation were asymptomatic hepatitis, gastritis and diarrhoea. The QTB-IT values decreased in all subjects who completed the treatment, in two (33%) of six of those who received treatment for less than 3 months and in one (50%) of two patients who discontinued therapy after 3 months. The QTB-IT test results never turned negative. Despite the small number of subjects, the study confirmed that PZA plus LVX is a poorly tolerated option for MDR LTBI treatment. We observed a large degree of variation in the results of the QTB-IT test results among participants. The study confirmed that the interferon gamma release assay is not a reliable tool for monitoring the treatment of MDR LTBI in clinical practice.
