RESUMEN
Procalcitonin (PCT) is useful for differentiating between viral and bacterial infections and for reducing the unnecessary use of antibiotics. As the rise of antimicrobial resistance reaches "alarming" levels according to the World Health Organization, the importance of using biomarkers, such as PCT to limit unnecessary antibiotic exposure has further increased. Randomized trials in patients with respiratory tract infections have shown that PCT has prognostic implications and its use, embedded in stewardship protocols, leads to reductions in the use of antibiotics in different clinical settings without compromising clinical outcomes. However, available data are heterogeneous and recent trials found no significant benefit. Still, from these trials, we have learned several key considerations for the optimal use of PCT, which depend on the clinical setting, severity of presentation, and pretest probability for bacterial infection. For patients with respiratory infections and sepsis, PCT can be used to determine whether to initiate antimicrobial therapy in low-risk settings and, together with clinical data, whether to discontinue antimicrobial therapy in certain high-risk settings. There is also increasing evidence regarding PCT-guided therapy in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This review provides an up-to-date overview of the use of PCT in different clinical settings and diseases, including a discussion about its potential to improve the care of patients with COVID-19.
Asunto(s)
Infecciones Bacterianas , COVID-19 , Sepsis , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Infecciones Bacterianas/diagnóstico , Infecciones Bacterianas/tratamiento farmacológico , Biomarcadores , Humanos , Polipéptido alfa Relacionado con Calcitonina , SARS-CoV-2 , Sepsis/tratamiento farmacológicoRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To externally validate four previously developed severity scores (i.e., CALL, CHOSEN, HA2T2 and ANDC) in patients with COVID-19 hospitalised in a tertiary care centre in Switzerland. METHODS: This observational analysis included adult patients with a real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction or rapid-antigen test confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection hospitalised consecutively at the Cantonal Hospital Aarau from February to December 2020. The primary endpoint was all-cause in-hospital mortality. The secondary endpoint was disease progression, defined as needing invasive ventilation, ICU admission or death. RESULTS: From 399 patients (mean age 66.6 years ± 13.4 SD, 68% males), we had complete data for calculating the CALL, CHOSEN, HA2T2 and ANDC scores in 297, 380, 151 and 124 cases, respectively. Odds ratios for all four scores showed significant associations with mortality. The discriminative power of the HA2T2 score was higher compared to CALL, CHOSEN and ANDC scores [area under the curve (AUC) 0.78 vs. 0.65, 0.69 and 0.66, respectively]. Negative predictive values (NPV) for mortality were high, particularly for the CALL score (≥ 6 points: 100%, ≥ 9 points: 95%). For disease progression, discriminative power was lower, with the CHOSEN score showing the best performance (AUC 0.66). CONCLUSION: In this external validation study, the four analysed scores had a lower performance compared to the original cohorts regarding prediction of mortality and disease progression. However, all scores were significantly associated with mortality and the NPV of the CALL and CHOSEN scores in particular allowed reliable identification of patients at low risk, making them suitable for outpatient management.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Adulto , Anciano , COVID-19/diagnóstico , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Femenino , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Hospitalización , Humanos , Masculino , SARS-CoV-2RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) disease (COVID-19) has been linked to thrombotic complications and endothelial dysfunction. We assessed the prognostic implications of endothelial activation through measurement of endothelin-I precursor peptide (proET-1), the stable precursor protein of Endothelin-1, in a well-defined cohort of patients hospitalized with COVID-19. METHODS: We measured proET-1 in 74 consecutively admitted adult patients with confirmed COVID-19 and compared its prognostic accuracy to that of patients with community-acquired pneumonia (n = 876) and viral bronchitis (n = 371) from a previous study by means of logistic regression analysis. The primary endpoint was all-cause 30-day mortality. RESULTS: Overall, median admission proET-1 levels were lower in COVID-19 patients compared to those with pneumonia and exacerbated bronchitis, respectively (57.0 pmol/l vs. 113.0 pmol/l vs. 96.0 pmol/l, p < 0.01). Although COVID-19 non-survivors had 1.5-fold higher admission proET-1 levels compared to survivors (81.8 pmol/l [IQR: 76 to 118] vs. 53.6 [IQR: 37 to 69]), no significant association of proET-1 levels and mortality was found in a regression model adjusted for age, gender, creatinine level, diastolic blood pressure as well as cancer and coronary artery disease (adjusted OR 0.1, 95% CI 0.0009 to 14.7). In patients with pneumonia (adjusted OR 25.4, 95% CI 5.1 to 127.4) and exacerbated bronchitis (adjusted OR 120.1, 95% CI 1.9 to 7499) we found significant associations of proET-1 and mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to other types of pulmonary infection, COVID-19 shows only a mild activation of the endothelium as assessed through measurement of proET-1. Therefore, the high mortality associated with COVID-19 may not be attributed to endothelial dysfunction by the surrogate marker proET-1.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19/mortalidad , COVID-19/fisiopatología , Endotelina-1/análisis , Endotelio Vascular/fisiopatología , Precursores de Proteínas/análisis , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Biomarcadores/análisis , Presión Sanguínea , Estudios de Cohortes , Creatinina/sangre , Determinación de Punto Final , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Pronóstico , Estudios Prospectivos , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Factores de Riesgo , Factores Sexuales , Análisis de SupervivenciaRESUMEN
AIM OF THE STUDY: To compare admission characteristics, predictors and outcomes of patients with confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hospitalised in a tertiary care hospital in Switzerland during the first and second waves of the pandemic. METHODS: This retrospective observational analysis included adult patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection confirmed by a real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) or rapid antigen test and hospitalised at the Cantonal Hospital Aarau from 26 February to 30 April 2020 (first wave) and from 1 October to 31 December 2020 (second wave). The primary endpoint was all-cause in-hospital mortality. The secondary endpoints were transfer to the intensive care unit (ICU) and length of hospital stay (LOS). RESULTS: Overall, 486 patients (mean age 65.9 years ± 14.7 SD, 65% male) were included. Ninety-two patients (19%) died during the hospital stay and 92 patients (19%) were transferred to the ICU. Admission characteristics, including comorbidities and frailty, were similar for patients of the first (n = 100) and second wave (n = 386). However, during the second wave the median time from symptom onset to presentation to the emergency department (ED) was shorter (7 days, interquartile range [IQR] 4–9 vs 8 days, IQR 4–11; p = 0.02). In the second wave, most patients received high-dose glucocorticoid treatment (0% vs 76%, p <0.01). In-hospital mortality was similar among COVID-19 patients in the first (19/100, 19%) and second wave (73/386, 19%); this finding persisted after full adjustment in multiple regression models (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.18, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.49–2.80; p = 0.71). Risk for ICU admission was also similar (24% vs 18%; aOR 0.98, 95% CI 0.46–2.06; p = 0.95). More patients were transferred to rehabilitation facilities in the second wave (18% vs 31%; aOR 2.06, 95% CI 1.04–4.07; p = 0.04) and LOS was 2.5 days shorter (9.0 vs 6.5 days; adjusted difference −2.53 days, 95%-CI −4.51 to −0.54; p = 0.01). Main predictors for in-hospital death were patient age (aOR 1.07, 95% CI 1.02–1.11; p <0.01), male sex (aOR 2.41, 95% CI 1.05–5.55; p = 0.04) and the age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity index (aOR 1.27, 95% CI 1.09–1.48 p <0.01). CONCLUSION: Despite differing treatment regimens, mortality and ICU admission remained largely unchanged for COVID-19 patients admitted during the second wave of the pandemic in our tertiary care hospital. However, discharge processes were optimised with patients leaving the hospital earlier and going to rehabilitation facilities more often.  .