Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 14 de 14
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Kardiologiia ; 61(10): 99-103, 2021 Oct 30.
Artigo em Russo | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34763644

RESUMO

The article presents recent data on possibilities of a broader use of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists for existing indications and of expanding indications for the use of this pharmaceutical group in the context of the novel coronavirus infection COVID-19. The authors discussed prospects for expanded detection of aldosteronism using a new diagnostic approach, including an additional evaluation of blood pressure response to spironolactone.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Hipertensão , Prova Pericial , Humanos , Antagonistas de Receptores de Mineralocorticoides , SARS-CoV-2 , Espironolactona
2.
Kardiologiia ; 61(4): 73-78, 2021 May 03.
Artigo em Russo | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33998412

RESUMO

In recent years there has been significant interest in treating iron deficiency (ID) in patients with heart failure (HF) due to its high prevalence and detrimental effects in this population. As stated in the 2020 Russain HF guidelines, Intravenous ferric carboxymaltose remains the only proven therapy for ID.This document was prompted by the results from the recent AFFIRM-AHF trial which demonstrates that treatment of ID after acute HF decompensation reduces the risk of future decompensations. Experts have concluded that in HF patients with acute decompensation, a left ventricular ejection fraction of < 50% and ID, Intravenous ferric carboxymaltose reduces future HF hospitalisations. Patients with stable HF may also benefit from treatment of ID to improve quality of life and alleviate symptoms.  It is, therefore, reasonable to screen for and treat ID in patients with HF.


Assuntos
Anemia Ferropriva , Insuficiência Cardíaca , Anemia Ferropriva/tratamento farmacológico , Consenso , Insuficiência Cardíaca/complicações , Insuficiência Cardíaca/tratamento farmacológico , Humanos , Ferro , Qualidade de Vida , Volume Sistólico , Função Ventricular Esquerda
3.
Kardiologiia ; 61(2): 28-39, 2021 Mar 02.
Artigo em Russo, Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33734044

RESUMO

Actuality One of the most widely discussed treatments for patients with COVID-19, especially at the beginning of the epidemy, was the use of the antimalarial drug hydroxychloroquine (HCQ). The first small non-randomized trials showed the ability of HCQ and its combination with azithromycin to accelerate the elimination of the virus and ease the acute phase of the disease. Later, large, randomized trials did not confirm it (RECOVERY, SOLIDARITY). This study is a case-control study in which we compared patients who received and did not receive HCQ.Material and Methods 103 patients (25 in the HCQ treatment group and 78 in the control group) with confirmed COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2 virus RNA was detected in 26 of 73 in the control group (35.6%) and in 10 of 25 (40%) in the HCQ group) and in the rest - a typical picture of viral pneumonia on multislice computed tomography [MSCT]) were included in the analysis. The severity of lung damage was limited to stages I-II, the CRP level should not exceed 60 mg/dL, and oxygen saturation in the air within 92-98%. We planned to analysis the duration of treatment of patients in the hospital, the days until the normalization of body temperature, the number of points according to the original SHOCS-COVID integral scale, and changes in its components (C-reactive protein (CRP), D-dimer, and the percentage of lung damage according to MSCT).Results Analysis for the whole group revealed a statistically significant increase in the time to normalization of body temperature from 4 to 7 days (by 3 days, p<0.001), and the duration of hospitalization from 9.4 to 11.8 days (by 2.4 days, p=0.002) when using HCQ in comparison with control. Given the incomplete balance of the groups, the main analysis included 46 patients who were matched by propensity score matching. The trend towards similar dynamics continued. HCQ treatment slowed down the time to normalization of body temperature by 1.8 days (p=0.074) and lengthened the hospitalization time by 2.1 days (p=0.042). The decrease in scores on the SHOCS -COVID scale was statistically significant in both groups, and there were no differences between them (delta - 3.00 (2.90) in the HCQ group and - 2.69 (1.55) in control, p=0.718). At the same time, in the control group, the CRP level returned to normal (4.06 mg/dl), and with the use of GC, it decreased but remained above the norm (6.21 mg/dl, p=0.05). Side effects requiring discontinuation of treatment were reported in 3 patients in the HCQ group and none in the control group.Conclusion We have not identified any positive properties of HCQ and its ability to influence the severity of COVID-19. This antimalarial agent slows down the normalization of the body's inflammatory response and lengthens the time spent in the hospital. HCQ should not be used in the treatment of COVID-19.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Infecções por Coronavirus , COVID-19/tratamento farmacológico , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Humanos , Hidroxicloroquina , SARS-CoV-2 , Resultado do Tratamento
4.
Kardiologiia ; 61(2): 15-27, 2021 Mar 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33734043

RESUMO

Actuality The course of the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is unpredictable. It manifests in some cases as increasing inflammation to even the onset of a cytokine storm and irreversible progression of acute respiratory syndrome, which is associated with the risk of death in patients. Thus, proactive anti-inflammatory therapy remains an open serious question in patients with COVID-19 and pneumonia, who still have signs of inflammation on days 7-9 of the disease: elevated C-reactive protein (CRP)>60 mg/dL and at least two of the four clinical signs: fever >37.5°C; persistent cough; dyspnea (RR >20 brpm) and/or reduced oxygen blood saturation <94% when breathing atmospheric air. We designed the randomized trial: COLchicine versus Ruxolitinib and Secukinumab in Open-label Prospective Randomized Trial in Patients with COVID-19 (COLORIT). We present here data comparing patients who received colchicine with those who did not receive specific anti-inflammatory therapy. Results of the comparison of colchicine, ruxolitinib, and secukinumab will be presented later.Objective Compare efficacy and safety of colchicine compared to the management of patients with COVID-19 without specific anti-inflammatory therapy.Material and Methods Initially, 20 people were expected to be randomized in the control group. However, enrollment to the control group was discontinued subsequently after the inclusion of 5 patients due to the risk of severe deterioration in the absence of anti-inflammatory treatment. Therefore, 17 patients, who had not received anti-inflammatory therapy when treated in the MSU Medical Research and Educational Center before the study, were also included in the control group. The effects were assessed on day 12 after the inclusion or at discharge if it occurred earlier than on day 12. The primary endpoint was the changes in the SHOCS-COVID score, which includes the assessment of the patient's clinical condition, CT score of the lung tissue damage, the severity of systemic inflammation (CRP changes), and the risk of thrombotic complications (D-dimer) [1].Results The median SHOCS score decreased from 8 to 2 (p = 0.017), i.e., from moderate to mild degree, in the colchicine group. The change in the SHOCS-COVID score was minimal and statistically insignificant in the control group. In patients with COVID-19 treated with colchicine, the CRP levels decreased rapidly and normalized (from 99.4 to 4.2 mg/dL, p<0.001). In the control group, the CRP levels decreased moderately and statistically insignificantly and achieved 22.8 mg/dL by the end of the follow-up period, which was still more than four times higher than normal. The most informative criterion for inflammation lymphocyte-to-C-reactive protein ratio (LCR) increased in the colchicine group by 393 versus 54 in the control group (p = 0.003). After treatment, it was 60.8 in the control group, which was less than 100 considered safe in terms of systemic inflammation progression. The difference from 427 in the colchicine group was highly significant (p = 0.003).The marked and rapid decrease in the inflammation factors was accompanied in the colchicine group by the reduced need for oxygen support from 14 (66.7%) to 2 (9.5%). In the control group, the number of patients without anti-inflammatory therapy requiring oxygen support remained unchanged at 50%. There was a trend to shorter hospital stays in the group of specific anti-inflammatory therapy up to 13 days compared to 17.5 days in the control group (p = 0.079). Moreover, two patients died in the control group, and there were no fatal cases in the colchicine group. In the colchicine group, one patient had deep vein thrombosis with D-dimer elevated to 5.99 µg/mL, which resolved before discharge.Conclusions Colchicine 1 mg for 1-3 days followed by 0.5 mg/day for 14 days is effective as a proactive anti-inflammatory therapy in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and viral pneumonia. The management of such patients without proactive anti-inflammatory therapy is likely to be unreasonable and may worsen the course of COVID-19. However, the findings should be treated with caution, given the small size of the trial.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Colchicina/uso terapêutico , Infecções por Coronavirus , SARS-CoV-2 , Anti-Inflamatórios/uso terapêutico , Infecções por Coronavirus/tratamento farmacológico , Humanos , Estudos Prospectivos , Resultado do Tratamento
5.
Kardiologiia ; 60(12): 13-47, 2021 Jan 19.
Artigo em Russo | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33522467

RESUMO

The document focuses on key issues of diuretic therapy in CHF from the standpoint of current views on the pathogenesis of edema syndrome, its diagnosis, and characteristics of using diuretics in various clinical situations.


Assuntos
Diuréticos , Insuficiência Cardíaca , Doença Crônica , Insuficiência Cardíaca/tratamento farmacológico , Humanos , Federação Russa
6.
Kardiologiia ; 60(8): 4-15, 2020 Sep 07.
Artigo em Russo | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33155953

RESUMO

The article focuses on effective treatment of the novel coronavirus infection (COVID-19) at early stages and substantiates the requirement for antiviral therapy and for decreasing the viral load to prevent the infection progression. The absence of a specific antiviral therapy for the SARS-CoV-2 virus is stated. The authors analyzed results of early randomized studies using lopinavir/ritonavir, remdesivir, and favipiravir in COVID-19 and their potential for the treatment of novel coronavirus infection. Among the drugs blocking the virus entry into cells, the greatest attention was paid to the antimalaria drugs, chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine. The article addresses in detail ineffectiveness and potential danger of hydroxychloroquine, which demonstrated neither a decrease in the time of clinical recovery nor any improvement of prognosis for patients with COVID-19. The major objective was substantiating a possible use of bromhexine, a mucolytic and anticough drug, which can inhibit transmembrane serin protease 2 required for entry of the SARS-CoV-2 virus into cells. Spironolactone may have a similar feature. Due to its antiandrogenic effects, spironolactone can inhibit X-chromosome-related synthesis of ACE-2 receptors and activation of transmembrane serin protease 2. In addition to slowing the virus entry into cells, spironolactone decreases severity of fibrosis in different organs, including the lungs. The major part of the article addresses clinical examples of managing patients with COVID-19 at the University Clinic of the Medical Research and Educational Centre of the M. V. Lomonosov Moscow State University, including successful treatment with schemes containing bromhexine and spironolactone. In conclusion, the authors described the design of a randomized, prospective BISCUIT study performed at the University Clinic of the M. V. Lomonosov Moscow State University with an objective of evaluating the efficacy of this scheme.


Assuntos
Bromoexina , Infecções por Coronavirus , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral , Espironolactona , Betacoronavirus , Bromoexina/uso terapêutico , COVID-19 , Infecções por Coronavirus/tratamento farmacológico , Hospitalização , Humanos , Moscou , Pneumonia Viral/tratamento farmacológico , Estudos Prospectivos , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , SARS-CoV-2 , Espironolactona/uso terapêutico
7.
Kardiologiia ; 60(9): 4-21, 2020 Oct 05.
Artigo em Russo | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33131470

RESUMO

The article is devoted to the treatment of the new coronavirus infection (COVID-19) in the advanced stages of the disease. The types of response of the immune system to the viral load of SARS-CoV-2 with the start of the inflammation process are considered. The situation is analyzed in detail in which the growing autoimmune inflammation (up to the development of a "cytokine storm") affects not only the pulmonary parenchyma, but also the endothelium of the small vessels of the lungs. Simultaneous damage to the alveoli and microthrombosis of the pulmonary vessels are accompanied by a progressive impairment of gas exchange, the development of acute respiratory distress syndrome, the treatment of which, even with the use of invasive ventilation, is ineffective and does not really change the prognosis of patients with COVID-19. In order to interrupt the pathological process at the earliest stages of the disease, the necessity of proactive anti-inflammatory therapy in combination with active anticoagulation treatment is substantiated. The results of the first randomized studies on the use of inhibitors of pro-inflammatory cytokines and chemokines (interleukin-6 (tocilizumab), interleukin-17 (secukinumab), Janus kinase blockers, through which the signal is transmitted to cells (ruxolitinib)), which have potential in the early treatment of COVID- 19. The use of a well-known anti-inflammatory drug colchicine (which is used for gout treatment) in patients with COVID-19 is considered. The design of the original COLORIT comparative study on the use of colchicine, ruxolitinib and secukinumab in the treatment of COVID-19 is presented. Clinical series presented, illustrated early anti-inflammatory therapy together with anticoagulants in patients with COVID-19 and the dangers associated with refusing to initiate such therapy on time.


Assuntos
Colchicina , Infecções por Coronavirus , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral , Anti-Inflamatórios/uso terapêutico , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados , Anticoagulantes/uso terapêutico , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Colchicina/uso terapêutico , Infecções por Coronavirus/tratamento farmacológico , Humanos , Estudos Prospectivos , Pirazóis , SARS-CoV-2
8.
Kardiologiia ; 60(6): 15-29, 2020 07 07.
Artigo em Inglês, Russo | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32720612

RESUMO

Introduction Coronavirus pneumonia not only severely affects the lung tissue but is also associated with systemic autoimmune inflammation, rapid overactivation of cytokines and chemokines known as "cytokine storm", and a high risk of thrombosis and thromboembolism. Since there is no specific therapy for this new coronavirus infection (COVID-19), searching for an effective and safe anti-inflammatory therapy is critical.Materials and methods This study evaluated efficacy and safety of pulse therapy with high doses of glucocorticosteroids (GCS), methylprednisolone 1,000 mg for 3 days plus dexamethasone 8 mg for another 3-5 days, in 17 patients with severe coronavirus pneumonia as a part of retrospective comparative analysis (17 patients in control group). The study primary endpoint was the aggregate dynamics of patients' condition as evaluated by an original CCS-COVID scale, which included, in addition to the clinical status, assessments of changes in the inflammation marker, C-reactive protein (CRP); the thrombus formation marker, D-dimer; and the extent of lung injury evaluated by computed tomography (CT). Patients had signs of lung injury (53.2 % and 25.6 %), increases in CRP 27 and 19 times, and a more than doubled level of D-dimer (to 1.41 µg/ml and 1.15 µg/ml) in the active therapy and the control groups, respectively. The GCS treatment group had a more severe condition at baseline.Results The GCS pulse therapy proved effective and significantly decreased the CCS-COVID scores. Median score difference was 5.00 compared to the control group (р=0.011). Shortness of breath considerably decreased; oxygen saturation increased, and the NEWS-2 clinical status scale scores decreased. In the GCS group, concentration of CRP significantly decreased from 134 mg/dl to 41.8 mg/dl (р=0.009) but at the same time, D-dimer level significantly increased from 1.41 µg/ml to 1.98 µg/ml (р=0.044). In the control group, the changes were nonsignificant. The dynamics of lung injury by CT was better in the treatment group but the difference did not reach a statistical significance (р=0.062). Following the GCS treatment, neutrophilia increased (р=0.0001) with persisting lymphopenia, and the neutrophil/lymphocyte (N/L) ratio, a marker of chronic inflammation, increased 2.5 times (р=0.006). The changes in the N/L ratio and D-dimer were found to correlate in the GCS pulse therapy group (r =0.49, p=0.04), which underlined the relationship of chronic autoimmune inflammation with thrombus formation in COVID-19. No significant changes were observed in the control group. In result, four patients developed venous thromboembolic complications (two of them had pulmonary artery thromboembolism) after the GCS pulse therapy despite the concomitant antiplatelet treatment at therapeutic doses. Recovery was slower in the hormone treatment group (median stay in the hospital was 26 days vs 18 days in the control group, р=0.001).Conclusion Pulse therapy with high doses of GCS exerted a rapid anti-inflammatory effect but at the same time, increased the N/L ratio and the D-dimer level, which increased the risk of thromboembolism.


Assuntos
Betacoronavirus , Infecções por Coronavirus , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral , Esteroides/efeitos adversos , Trombose Venosa , COVID-19 , Infecções por Coronavirus/tratamento farmacológico , Humanos , Inflamação , Pneumonia Viral/tratamento farmacológico , Estudos Retrospectivos , SARS-CoV-2 , Trombose Venosa/induzido quimicamente
9.
Kardiologiia ; 60(5): 1149, 2020 Jun 03.
Artigo em Russo | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32515706

RESUMO

Aim To study tactics of outpatient physicians in choosing the treatment when the previous double antihypertensive therapy (AHT) fails and to analyze the effectivity of an amlodipine/indapamide/perindopril arginine triple combination (TC).Material and methods The program included 1252 patients with arterial hypertension (AH); the TC group consisted of 992 (79.23 %) patients (38.3 % males; age, 61.6 [55.0; 67.9]); the control group included 260 (20.77 %) patients (37.7 % males; age, 60.6 [53.3; 67.4]). The main inclusion criteria were essential AH, age 18-79 years, insufficient response to previous AHT (clinical systolic blood pressure (SBP) >140-179 mm Hg). The study duration was three months. The following parameters were evaluated: dynamics of clinical and ambulatory BP (BP self-monitoring (BPSM); frequency of achieving the first goal of <140 / 90 mm Hg and the goal of <130 / 80 mm Hg); and changes in glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and quality of life (QoL). Responses to TC were analyzed in groups with different ranges of increased baseline SBP in patients with AH and diabetes mellitus (DM)/impaired glucose tolerance (IGT), overweight or obesity, and chronic kidney disease (CKD, reduced estimated GFR (eGFR <60 ml/min/1.73 m2). Safety was evaluated based on records of adverse events (AEs).Results The TC group had a more severe condition at baseline by clinical parameters and history and had higher baseline BP, which made difficult the intergroup comparison. Nevertheless at three months, the decrease in clinical SBP was more pronounced in the TC group (from 162.1  to 126.8 mm Hg, Δ=35.7  mm Hg) than in the control group (from 157.8 to 128.4  mm Hg, Δ=29.4  mm Hg). 87.8% of patients in the TC group and 81.9 % (р=0.012) in the control group achieved the first BP goal of <140 / 90 mm Hg; 34.3% and 28.2% of patients, respectively, achieved the BP goal of <130 / 80 mm Hg (р=0.055). The more effective SBP control in the TC group was associated with a pronounced BP decrease with higher BP values at baseline, which was also confirmed by an analysis in subgroups with SBP 140-160, 160-180, and >180 mm Hg. The TC treatment was associated with a pronounced antihypertensive effect with respect of BPSM values, improved QoL, and renal function. Significant decreases in BP and achievement of BP goals by a vast majority of patients receiving TC were also observed in subgroups with DM or IGT, overweight and/or obesity, and CKD. AEs were observed during the treatment only in 8 patients (0.64 %), which confirmed good tolerability and high safety of the therapy.Conclusion The study results demonstrated a therapeutic effect of the amlodipine/indapamide/perindopril arginine fixed-dose combination (Triplixam®). This effect was evident as control of clinical BP with any baseline BP level, including different ranges of increased SBP, in AH combined with DM, IGT, obesity, and CKD, which offers advantages over a subjective choice of AHT. TC improved BPSM values, QoL indexes, provided nephroprotection, and was well tolerated.


Assuntos
Hipertensão , Idoso , Anlodipino , Anti-Hipertensivos , Arginina , Pressão Sanguínea , Monitorização Ambulatorial da Pressão Arterial , Combinação de Medicamentos , Feminino , Humanos , Indapamida , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Perindopril , Qualidade de Vida , Resultado do Tratamento
10.
Kardiologiia ; 60(4): 18-23, 2020 Mar 27.
Artigo em Russo | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32394852

RESUMO

Introduction Physical exercise (PE) is a necessary part in the treatment of patients with chronic heart failure (CHF), which is stated in the European Society of Cardiology guidelines and the Russian Heart Failure Society guidelines. However, this type of non-drug treatment is still not sufficiently used in HF patients in Russia.Aim To study the current involvement of HF patients in PT and to describe psychosocial factors that influence the patients' willingness to exercise and potential barriers and motivations for PE.Methods This study was designed as an in-moment survey. Patients with CHF who visited clinics in 7 cities of the Russian Federation in 2018 as a part of European Heart Failure Awareness Days were provided with a self-administered questionnaire containing questions about their social and educational status, attitude to PT as a method of treatment, and factors motivating and demotivating them to participation in training sessions. The survey participants were also asked a question about their source of information about exercise in HF. Physicians filled in the items describing HF clinical manifestations (left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) and HF functional class (FC)). Code numbers were used for further identification of the participants and to protect their confidentiality. Statistical analysis was performed with the StatXcat-8 program. Limits of exact confidence intervals (CIs) were provided both for fractions and parameters of polynomial distribution. CI limits for differences and fractions were calculated using MOVER. Age was analyzed using the PAST program.Results The study included 560 patients with HF; 52 % of them were women (mean age, 64; 95 % CI: 63-65 years). Women were 3 years older than men (95 % CI: 1.3-4.9 years). 501 (89.5 %) patients had FC II-III; 265 (49 %) patients had HF with low EF. 350 (62 %) patients had comorbidities: 41.4 % of patients had diabetes mellitus and 25.4 % of patients had arthritis. Only 91 (17 %) patients reported exercising. Patients younger than 65 exercised significantly more frequently than older ones (odds ratio (OR), 1.7, 95 % CI: 1.0-2.7, р<0.001). Patients with higher education had better chances to be involved in PT or were more anxious to start training (OR, 2.7; 95 % CI: 1.6-4.7, р<0.001). The capability for influencing the disease was the major motivation for PT for both sexes. Probability of this answer was 48 % (95 % CI: 33-61) for men and 46 % (95 % CI: 29-63) for women. 62 % of patients indicated poor health as the major barrier for participation in PT. Only 55 % of patients knew that PT could be a method for HF treatment, and only 50 % were informed about that by their physician.Conclusion The factors that positively influence the willingness to exercise include male sex, higher level of education, younger age, and better perception of the own health condition. 62 % of patients indicated poor health as the major barrier for participation in training. On the whole, the awareness of patients about PT benefits for health in HF was low. To our opinion, this was a serious factor of the extremely low involvement of patients in PT. Only 55 % of patients knew that PT could be a method for HF treatment, and, furthermore, only 50 % of patients received this information from their physicians.


Assuntos
Insuficiência Cardíaca , Motivação , Idoso , Terapia por Exercício , Feminino , Humanos , Doença Iatrogênica , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Federação Russa , Volume Sistólico , Função Ventricular Esquerda
11.
Kardiologiia ; 60(11): 35-41, 2020 Dec 05.
Artigo em Russo | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33487148

RESUMO

Aim Development of a novel scale for assessing medical state in patients with new coronavirus infection based on clinical and laboratory disease severity's markers, named SHOKS-COVID scale.Material and Methods Clinical Assessment Scale (SHOKS-COVID) is based on1: clinical parameters (respiratory rate, Body temperature, SpO2 need and type of ventilation support) 2: Inflammation markers (C reactive protein (CRP) and prothrombotic marker (D-dimer)) and 3: percent of lungs injury by CT. This scale was used in several clinical studies in patients with varying severity of the course of the COVID 19. SHOKS-COVID scale was also compared against some additional biomarkers and with length of hospital stay.Results In patients with severe COVID-19 (Clinical Trial WAYFARER - 34 patients), SHOKS-COVID scores were correlated with the degree of inflammation: CRP (r = 0.64; p <0.0001); the ratio lymphocytes / CRP (r = - 0.64; p <0.0001). Also, SHOKS-COVID score correlated with the D-dimer (r = 0.35; p <0.0001) and percentage lung damage on multispiral computed tomography (MSCT) - (r = 0.77, p < 0.0001) and length stay in the clinic (r = 0.57, p = 0.0009). In patients with mild course (BISQUIT Study - 103 patients), SHOKS-COVID scores had a statistically significant positive correlation with length of fever (r = 0.37; p = 0.0002) and length of stay in the clinic (r = 0.52, p <0.0001) and negatively correlated with the ratio of lymphocytes / CRP (-0.78, p <0.0001) and the level of CRP (r=0.78; p <0.0001). Patents were grouped based on severity of COVID 19 and median and interquartile range (IQR) of SHOCKS-COVID were measured in these groups. Median and IQR of SHOCKS-COVID were 2.00 [1.0-2.5] points in mild course, 4.0 points [3.0-5.0] in moderate course, 7.0 points [6.0-9.0] in moderately severe course,12.0 points [10.0-14.0] in severe course of disease and 15.0 points [14.5-15.5] in extremely severe patients.Conclusion Here we report a novel scale of COVID 19 disease progression. This scale ranges from zero in asymptomatic patients (with normal range of biomarkers and without lung damage on CT) to fifteen in extremely severe patients. The scores for SHOKS-COVID are increasing, in parallel with the deterioration of all other biomarkers of severity and prognosis in patients with new coronavirus infection. Based on the analysis carried out, we were able to determine values of SHOKS-COVID scale and levels of main clinical and laboratory markers in patients with different severity of COVID 19.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Infecções por Coronavirus , Hospitais , Humanos , Pacientes Ambulatoriais , Estudos Retrospectivos , SARS-CoV-2
12.
Kardiologiia ; 60(11): 4-15, 2020 12 03.
Artigo em Inglês, Russo | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33487145

RESUMO

Introduction The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of a combination of bromhexine at a dose of 8 mg 4 times a day and spironolactone 50 mg per day in patients with mild and moderate COVID 19.Material and methods It was an open, prospective comparative non-randomized study. 103 patients were included (33 in the bromhexine and spironolactone group and 70 in the control group). All patients had a confirmed 2019 novel coronavirus infection (COVID 19) based on a positive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for SARS-CoV-2 virus RNA and/or a typical pattern of viral pneumonia on multispiral computed tomography. The severity of lung damage was limited to stage I-II, the level of CRP should not exceed 60 mg / dL and SO2 in the air within 92-98%. The duration of treatment is 10 days.Results The decrease in scores on the SHOKS-COVID scale, which, in addition to assessing the clinical status, the dynamics of CRP (a marker of inflammation), D-dimer (a marker of thrombus formation), and the degree of lung damage on CT (primary endpoint) was statistically significant in both groups and differences between them was not identified. Analysis for the group as a whole revealed a statistically significant reduction in hospitalization time from 10.4 to 9.0 days (by 1.5 days, p=0.033) and fever time from 6.5 to 3.9 days (by 2.5 days, p<0.001). Given the incomplete balance of the groups, the main analysis included 66 patients who were match with using propensity score matching. In matched patients, temperature normalization in the bromhexine/spironolactone group occurred 2 days faster than in the control group (p=0.008). Virus elimination by the 10th day was recorded in all patients in the bromhexine/spironolactone group; the control group viremia continued in 23.3% (p=0.077). The number of patients who had a positive PCR to the SARS-CoV-2 virus on the 10th day of hospitalization or longer (≥10 days) hospitalization in the control group was 20/21 (95.2%), and in the group with bromhexine /spironolactone -14/24 (58.3%), p=0.012. The odds ratio of having a positive PCR or more than ten days of hospitalization was 0.07 (95% CI: 0.008 - 0.61, p=0.0161) with bromhexine and spironolactone versus controls. No side effects were reported in the study group.Conclusion The combination of bromhexine with spironolactone appeared effective in treating a new coronavirus infection by achieving a faster normalization of the clinical condition, lowering the temperature one and a half times faster, and reducing explanatory combine endpoint the viral load or long duration of hospitalization (≥ 10 days).


Assuntos
Bromoexina , COVID-19 , Infecções por Coronavirus , Hospitalização , Humanos , Estudos Prospectivos , SARS-CoV-2 , Espironolactona , Resultado do Tratamento
13.
Kardiologiia ; 59(2S): 15-24, 2019 Mar 07.
Artigo em Russo | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30853009

RESUMO

The review discusses mechanisms for the development of the pathology of the respiratory system in patients with CHF, such as various types of periodic respiration, pulmonary hypertension due to the pathology of the left chambers of the heart, and remodeling of the respiratory musculature. The role of chemo- and baroreceptors of the carotid zone, as well as the hyperactivation of the respiratory muscle metaboreflex in the development of the pathology of the respiratory system, and the mediated exacerbation of CHF are discussed.


Assuntos
Insuficiência Cardíaca , Coração , Humanos , Sistema Respiratório
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...