Hyponatremia after COVID-19 is frequent in the first year and increases re-admissions.

Hyponatremia on admission has been related to worse outcomes in patients with COVID-19 infection. However, little is known about the frequency and the associated risk factors of hyponatremia after COVID-19 discharge. We performed an observational 24-month follow-up study of patients admitted during the first COVID-19 wave. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess the main variables in predicting hyponatremia on follow-up (HYPO-FU). A total of 161 out of 683 (24.4%) developed HYPO-FU. The group with HYPO-FU comprised of more men [(62.3%) vs. (49.2%); p < 0.01], older [65.6 ± 18.2 vs. 60.3 ± 17.0; p < 0.01] and more frequently re-admitted [(16.2%) vs. (3.8%); p < 0.01). The rate of HYPO-FU was higher in the first year 23.6 per 100 individuals per year. After Cox regression analysis, the independent risk factors of HYPO-FU were diabetes [OR 2.12, IC 95% (1.48-3.04)], hypertension [OR 2.18, IC 95% (1.53-3.12)], heart failure [OR 3.34, IC 95% (1.72-6.48)] and invasive ventilation support requirement [OR: 2.38, IC 95% (1.63-3.50)]. To conclude, HYPO-FU was frequent in the first year after COVID-19 infection, and the risk was higher in older men with comorbidities, increasing rehospitalisation. Further studies aimed at evaluating the beneficial effects of correcting hyponatremia in these patients are warranted.

The Role of Inflammatory Phenotype in Patients With Exacerbation-prone Asthma and Ongoing Therapy

Introduction: The risk factors for having frequent exacerbations are not well documented in cohort studies of patients with asthma on existing therapy. The objective of the present study was to compare the clinical and inflammatory characteristics of patients with exacerbation-prone asthma (EPA) with a history of two or more exacerbations in the previous year with those who had presented just one or no exacerbation. Methods: An ambispective observational study was conducted in a tertiary hospital. Patients diagnosed with moderate or severe asthma and ongoing therapy, whose inflammatory profile was determined by means of allergy and atopy status, blood eosinophilia and induced sputum were included. Patients were classified according to the number of asthma exacerbations in EPA (≥2 exacerbations in the previous year) vs. non-exacerbators (≤1 exacerbation in the previous year). Clinical, lung function and inflammatory characteristics of the two groups were compared. Results: Three hundred ten patients were visited in the Asthma Unit in 2018 and the combination of atopy and allergy status, blood eosinophilia and induced sputum was obtained in 96 (31%) patients. Of this latter group, 46 patients (47%) presented EPA compared to 50 (53%) non-exacerbators. Airway and blood eosinophilic inflammation did not differ between EPA and non-exacerbators in patients with asthma and ongoing therapy, and it was not a risk factor for EPA in our cohort. Conclusion: Airway or blood type 2 inflammation status is not a valid tool for recognizing EPA or predicting asthma exacerbations in asthma patients following controller therapy. (AU)

The Role of Inflammatory Phenotype in Patients With Exacerbation-prone Asthma and Ongoing Therapy.

INTRODUCTION: The risk factors for having frequent exacerbations are not well documented in cohort studies of patients with asthma on existing therapy. The objective of the present study was to compare the clinical and inflammatory characteristics of patients with exacerbation-prone asthma (EPA) with a history of two or more exacerbations in the previous year with those who had presented just one or no exacerbation. METHODS: An ambispective observational study was conducted in a tertiary hospital. Patients diagnosed with moderate or severe asthma and ongoing therapy, whose inflammatory profile was determined by means of allergy and atopy status, blood eosinophilia and induced sputum were included. Patients were classified according to the number of asthma exacerbations in EPA (≥2 exacerbations in the previous year) vs. non-exacerbators (≤1 exacerbation in the previous year). Clinical, lung function and inflammatory characteristics of the two groups were compared. RESULTS: Three hundred ten patients were visited in the Asthma Unit in 2018 and the combination of atopy and allergy status, blood eosinophilia and induced sputum was obtained in 96 (31%) patients. Of this latter group, 46 patients (47%) presented EPA compared to 50 (53%) non-exacerbators. Airway and blood eosinophilic inflammation did not differ between EPA and non-exacerbators in patients with asthma and ongoing therapy, and it was not a risk factor for EPA in our cohort. CONCLUSION: Airway or blood type 2 inflammation status is not a valid tool for recognizing EPA or predicting asthma exacerbations in asthma patients following controller therapy.

Efficacy and safety of once-daily single-inhaler triple therapy in patients with inadequately controlled asthma: the CAPTAIN trial.

Triple therapy with FF/UMEC/VI improved lung function in patients with moderate or severe uncontrolled asthma on ICS/LABA but did not lead to a reduction in moderate and/or severe exacerbations https://bit.ly/38UnuRW.