Clinical characteristics of COVID-19 in hospitalized children during the Omicron variant predominant period

IntroductionInformation regarding the clinical manifestations and outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in children under the Omicron variant predominant period is still limited.MethodsA nationwide retrospective cohort study was conducted. Pediatric COVID-19 patients (<18 years of age) hospitalized between August 1, 2021 and March 31, 2022 were enrolled. Epidemiological and clinical characteristics between the Delta variant predominant period (August 1 to December 31, 2021) and the Omicron variant predominant period (January 1 to March 31, 2022) were compared.ResultsDuring the study period, 458 cases in the Delta predominant period and 389 cases in the Omicron predominant period were identified. Median age was younger (6.0 vs. 8.0 years, P = 0.004) and underlying diseases were more common (n = 65, 16.7% vs. n = 53, 11.6%) in the Omicron predominant period than those in the Delta variant predominant era. For clinical manifestations, fever ≥38.0 °C at 2 to <13 years old, sore throat at ≥ 13 years, and seizures at 2 to <13 years old were more commonly observed, and dysgeusia and olfactory dysfunction at ≥ 6 years old were less commonly observed in the Omicron variant predominant period. The number of patients requiring noninvasive oxygen support was higher in the Omicron predominant period than that in the Delta predominant period; however, intensive care unit admission rates were similar and no patients died in both periods.ConclusionsIn the Omicron variant predominant period, more pediatric COVID-19 patients experienced fever and seizures, although the overall outcomes were still favorable.     

Comparison of clinical characteristics of COVID-19 in pregnant women between the Delta and Omicron variants of concern predominant periods

BackgroundInformation regarding effects of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variant strains on clinical manifestations and outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in pregnant women is limited.MethodsA retrospective observational study was conducted using the data from the nationwide COVID-19 registry in Japan. We identified pregnant patients with symptomatic COVID-19 hospitalized during the study period. The Delta and Omicron variants of concern (VOC) predominant periods were defined as August 1 to December 31, 2021 and January 1 to May 31, 2022, respectively. Clinical characteristics were compared between the patients in the Delta and Omicron VOC periods. In addition, logistic regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors for developing moderate-to-severe COVID-19.ResultsDuring the study period, 310 symptomatic COVID-19 cases of pregnant women were identified; 111 and 199 patients were hospitalized during the Delta and Omicron VOC periods, respectively. Runny nose and sore throat were more common, and fatigue, dysgeusia, and olfactory dysfunction were less common manifestations observed in the Omicron VOC period. In the multivariable logistic regression analysis, onset during the later stage of pregnancy (OR: 2.08 [1.24–3.71]) and onset during the Delta VOC period (OR: 2.25 [1.08–4.90]) were independently associated with moderate-to-severe COVID-19, whereas two doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine were protective against developing moderate-to-severe COVID-19 (OR: 0.34 [0.13–0.84]).ConclusionsClinical manifestations of COVID-19 in pregnant women differed between the Delta and Omicron VOC periods. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination was still effective in preventing severe COVID-19 throughout the Delta and Omicron VOC periods.     

Clinical efficacy of casirivimab-imdevimab antibody combination treatment in patients with COVID-19 Delta variant

IntroductionCasirivimab-imdevimab, an antibody cocktail containing two severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 neutralizing antibodies, reduces the viral load and the risk of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related hospitalization or death. The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy of casirivimab-imdevimab in patients with COVID-19 Delta variant in Japan.MethodsThis study was conducted at five institutions and assessed a total of 461 patients with COVID-19 who met the inclusion criteria. The treatment group received a dose of casirivimab-imdevimab consisting of a cocktail of two monoclonal antibodies, (casirivimab 600 mg and imdevimab 600 mg intravenously). The control consisted of age- and sex-matched COVID-19 patients (n = 461) who sufficed the inclusion criteria but did not receive casirivimab-imdevimab. The outcome was the requirement of oxygen therapy.ResultsIn the treatment group, patients received oxygen therapy (n = 30), nasal canula (n = 23), high flow nasal cannula (n = 5), and mechanical ventilation (n = 2). In the control group, patients received oxygen therapy (n = 56), nasal canula (n = 45), high flow nasal cannula (n = 8), and mechanical ventilation (n = 3). The administration of oxygen therapy was significantly lower in the treatment group than the control group (6.5% vs. 12.1%, P = 0.0044). All these patients admitted to our hospitals and received additional therapy and recovered.ConclusionsOur results demonstrate that the casirivimab-imdevimab combination antibody treatment is associated with reduced rates of requiring oxygen therapy among high-risk patients with COVID-19 Delta variant.     

Clinical characteristics and prognosis of immunosuppressed inpatients with COVID-19 in Japan

IntroductionWe aimed to analyze the clinical characteristics and outcomes of immunosuppressed inpatients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).MethodsIn this observational study, we utilized a large nationwide registry of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in Japan. Patients’ baseline characteristics and outcomes were compared according to the immunosuppressed states of the patients. The impact of different therapeutic agents on the clinical courses of the patients was evaluated.ResultsData of 14,760 patients were included, and 887 (5.9%) were immunosuppressed. The immunosuppressed state of the patient resulted from solid tumor (43.3%, n = 384), chemotherapy within 3 months (15.6%, n = 138), collagen disease (16.9%, n = 150), use of immunosuppressive agents (16.0%, n = 142), and metastatic solid tumor (13.5%, n = 120). Immunosuppressed patients were older and had a higher severity of illness at admission and during hospitalization than non-immunosuppressed patients. The mortality rates for major diseases causing immunosuppression were as follows: solid tumor, 12.5% (48/384; P < 0.001; relative risk [RR], 3.41); metastatic solid tumor, 31.7% (38/120; P < 0.001; RR, 8.43); leukemia, 23.1% (9/39; P < 0.001; RR, 5.87); lymphoma, 33.3% (20/60; P < 0.001; RR, 8.63); and collagen disease, 15.3% (23/150; P < 0.001; RR 3.97). Underlying diseases with high mortality rates were not necessarily associated with high rates of invasive supportive care.ConclusionsThe prognosis of immunosuppressed COVID-19 inpatients varied according to the different immunosuppressed states. Multiple factors, including the severity of the underlying diseases, might have affected their invasive supportive care indications.     

Differential Expression of Rab5 and Rab7 Small GTPase Proteins in Placental Tissues From Pregnancies Affected by Maternal Coronavirus Disease 2019

PurposeThe majority of pregnancies affected by maternal coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) do not result in fetal transmission. However, several studies have identified parenchymal changes in their placental tissues, suggesting a placental response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) at the maternal–fetal interface. Although many COVID-19 placental studies have focused on the expression of the canonical SARS-CoV-2 entry proteins angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and transmembrane serine protease 2, further characterization of subcellular molecules involved in viral trafficking have not yet been investigated in these tissues. Of interest are Rab proteins, a family of small GTPase proteins that direct intracellular transport between different endocytic organelles. Rab5 and Rab7 in particular have previously been implicated in HIV and cytomegalovirus invasion of placental trophoblast cells in vitro; the localization of these molecules has not been fully characterized within the human maternal–fetal interface, however, or within placental tissues from SARS-CoV-2–infected pregnancies.MethodsUsing fluorescent immunohistochemistry, Rab5 and Rab7 placental localization and comparative fluorescence intensity were explored in a cohort of placental tissues from pregnancies affected by maternal COVID-19 disease (COVID, n = 15) compared with contemporary control subjects (Control, n = 10). Fluorescence intensity was quantified by using corrected total cell fluorescence values.FindingsWithin placental villi, Rab5 was consistently localized in syncytiotrophoblast and cytotrophoblast cells. Rab5 had significantly higher mean (SEM) fluorescence intensity in the COVID cohort (Control, 1.96 [0.16]; COVID, 2.62 [0.09]; P = 0.0014). In contrast, although Rab7 was also localized within placental villous syncytiotrophoblast and cytotrophoblast cells, mean (SEM) Rab7 fluorescence intensity was significantly downregulated in COVID vs Control placentas (Control, 35.9 [4.1]; COVID, 20.1 [0.52]; P = 0.0001).ImplicationsThis differential expression of Rab5 and Rab7 suggests that placental endocytic pathways may be altered at the maternal–fetal interface in pregnancies affected by maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection. As key molecules governing intracellular vesicle transport, including viral trafficking, Rab GTPase proteins may be of interest for ongoing studies examining placental responses to COVID-19 in pregnancy.     

Curbing the Delta Surge: Clinical Outcomes After Treatment With Bamlanivimab-Etesevimab,Casirivimab-Imdevimab,or Sotrovimab for Mild to Moderate Coronavirus Disease 2019

ObjectiveTo describe and compare the clinical outcomes of bamlanivimab-etesevimab, casirivimab-imdevimab, and sotrovimab treatment of mild to moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) during the severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) B.1.617.2 Delta surge.MethodsThis is a retrospective study of high-risk patients who received bamlanivimab-etesevimab, casirivimab-imdevimab, and sotrovimab for mild to moderate COVID-19 between August 1, 2021, and December 1, 2021. Rates of severe disease, hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, and death were assessed.ResultsAmong 10,775 high-risk patients who received bamlanivimab-etesevimab, casirivimab-imdevimab, or sotrovimab for mild to moderate COVID-19 during the Delta surge, 287 patients (2.7%) developed severe disease that led to hospitalization, oxygen supplementation, or death within 30 days after treatment. The rates of severe disease were low among patients treated with bamlanivimab-etesevimab (1.2%), casirivimab-imdevimab (2.9%), and sotrovimab (1.6%; P<.01). The higher rate of severe outcomes among patients treated with casirivimab-imdevimab may be related to a significantly lower COVID-19 vaccination rate in that cohort. Intensive care unit admission was comparable among patients treated bamlanivimab-etesevimab, casirivimab-imdevimab, or sotrovimab (1.0%, 1.0%, and 0.4%, respectively).ConclusionThis real-world study of a large cohort of high-risk patients shows low rates of severe disease, hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, and mortality after treatment with bamlanivimab-etesevimab, casirivimab-imdevimab, and sotrovimab for mild to moderate COVID-19 during the SARS-CoV-2 Delta surge.     

Efficacy of convalescent plasma therapy for COVID-19 in Japan: An open-label,randomized, controlled trial

BackgroundConvalescent plasma is a potential therapeutic option for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Despite its use for treating several viral infections, we lack comprehensive data on its efficacy against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).MethodsWe conducted a multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled trial of convalescent plasma therapy with high neutralizing activity against SARS-CoV-2 in high-risk patients within five days after the onset of COVID-19 symptoms. The primary endpoint was the time-weighted average change in the SARS-CoV-2 viral load in nasopharyngeal swabs from days 0–5.ResultsBetween February 24, 2021, and November 30, 2021, 25 patients were randomly assigned to either convalescent plasma (n = 14) or standard of care (n = 11) groups. Four patients discontinued their allocated convalescent plasma, and 21 were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. The median interval between the symptom onset and plasma administration was 4.5 days (interquartile range, 3–5 days). The primary outcome of the time-weighted average change in the SARS-CoV-2 viral load in nasopharyngeal swabs did not significantly differ between days 0–5 (1.2 log₁₀ copies/mL in the convalescent plasma vs. 1.2 log₁₀ copies/mL in the standard of care (effect estimate, 0.0 [95% confidence interval, −0.8–0.7]; P = 0.94)). No deaths were observed in either group.ConclusionsThe early administration of convalescent plasma with high neutralizing activity did not contribute to a decrease in the viral load within five days compared with the standard of care alone.     

Characteristics of hospitalized COVID-19 patients with other respiratory pathogens identified by rapid diagnostic test

Rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) significantly impact disease treatment strategy. In Japan, information on the use of RDTs for patients with COVID-19 is limited. Here, we aimed to investigate the RDT implementation rate, pathogen detection rate, and clinical characteristics of patients positive for other pathogens by using COVIREGI-JP, a national registry of hospitalized patients with COVID-19.A total of 42,309 COVID-19 patients were included. For immunochromatographic testing, influenza was the most common (n = 2881 [6.8%]), followed by Mycoplasma pneumoniae (n = 2129 [5%]) and group A streptococcus (GAS) (n = 372 [0.9%]). Urine antigen testing was performed for 5524 (13.1%) patients for S. pneumoniae and for 5326 patients (12.6%) for L. pneumophila.The completion rate of M. pneumonia loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) testing was low (n = 97 [0.2%]). FilmArray RP was performed in 372 (0.9%) patients; 1.2% (36/2881) of patients were positive for influenza, 0.9% (2/223) for the respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), 9.6% (205/2129) for M. pneumoniae, and 7.3% (27/372) for GAS. The positivity rate for urine antigen testing was 3.3% (183/5524) for S. pneumoniae and 0.2% (13/5326) for L. pneumophila. The positivity rate for LAMP test was 5.2% (5/97) for M. pneumoniae. Five of 372 patients (1.3%) had positive FilmArray RP, with human enterovirus being the most frequently detected (1.3%, 5/372).The characteristics of patients with and without RDTs submission and positive and negative results differed for each pathogen. RDTs remain an important diagnostic tool in patients with COVID-19 in whom coinfection with other pathogens needs to be tested based on clinical evaluation.     

Convalescent Plasma for Patients Hospitalized With Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Meta-Analysis With Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Current evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews on the utility of convalescent plasma (CP) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) suggests a lack of benefit. We conducted an updated meta-analysis of RCTs with trial sequential analysis to investigate whether convalescent plasma is futile in reducing mortality in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. We searched 6 databases from December 1, 2019 to August 1, 2021 for RCTs comparing the use of CP with standard of care or transfusion of non-CP standard plasma in patients with COVID-19. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias 2 Tool. Random effects (DerSimonian and Laird) meta-analyses were conducted. The primary outcome was the aggregate risk for in-hospital mortality between both arms. We conducted a trial sequential analysis (TSA) based on the pooled relative risks (RRs) for in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included the pooled RR for receipt of mechanical ventilation and mean difference in hospital length of stay. We included 18 RCTs (8702 CP, 7906 control). CP was not associated with a significant mortality benefit (RR: 0.95, 95%-CI: 0.86-1.04, P = .27, high certainty). Subgroup analysis did not find any significant differences (p_interaction = 0.30) between patients who received CP within 8 days of symptom onset (RR: 0.97, 95%-CI: 0.79-1.19, P = .80), or after 8 days (RR: 0.79, 95%-CI: 0.57-1.10, P = .16). TSA based on a RR reduction of 10% from a baseline mortality of 20% found that CP was not effective, with the pooled effect within the boundary for futility. CP did not significantly reduce the requirement for mechanical ventilation (RR: 1.00, 95%-CI: 0.91-1.10, P = .99, moderate certainty) or hospital length of stay (+1.32, 95%-CI: -1.86 to +4.52, P = .42, low certainty). CP does not improve relevant clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19, especially in severe disease. The pooled effect of mortality was within the boundary of futility, suggesting the lack of benefit of CP in patients hospitalized with COVID-19.     

The Impact of COVID-19 Surge on Clinical Palliative Care: A Descriptive Study From a New York Hospital System

ContextIn spring 2020, New York experienced a surge of patients hospitalized with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2 or COVID-19) disease, as part of a global pandemic. There are limited data on populations of COVID-19–infected patients seen by palliative care services.ObjectiveTo describe a palliative care population at one New York hospital system during the initial pandemic surge.MethodsThis repeated cross-sectional, observational study collected data on palliative care patients in a large health system seen during the COVID-19 outbreak and compared it with pre-COVID data.ResultsPalliative service volume surged from 678 (4% of total admissions) before COVID-19 to 1071 (10% of total admissions) during the COVID-19 outbreak. During the outbreak, 695 (64.9%) of the total palliative patients tested positive for the virus. Compared with a preoutbreak group, this COVID-19–positive group had higher rates of male (60.7% vs. 48.6%, P < 0.01) and Latino (21.3% vs. 13.3%; P < 0.01) patients and less white patients (21.3% vs. 13.3%; P < 0.01). Our patients with COVID-19 also had greater prevalence of obesity and diabetes and lower rates of end-stage organ disease and cancers. The COVID-19–positive group had a higher rate of intensive care unit admissions (58.9% vs. 33.9%; P < 0.01) and in-hospital mortality rate (57.4% vs. 13.1%; P < 0.01) than the preoutbreak group. There was increased odds of mortality in palliative care patients who were COVID-19 positive (odds ratio = 3.21; 95% confidence interval = 2.43–4.24) and those admitted to the intensive care unit (odds ratio = 1.45; 95% confidence interval = 1.11–1.9).ConclusionDuring the initial surge of the COVID-19 pandemic in New York, palliative care services experienced a large surge of patients who tended to be healthier at baseline and more acutely ill at the time of admission than pre–COVID-19 palliative patients.     

Mechanical ventilation and mortality among 223 critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019: A multicentric study in Germany

BackgroundThere are large uncertainties with regard to the outcome of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and mechanical ventilation (MV). High mortality (50–97%) was proposed by some groups, leading to considerable uncertainties with regard to outcomes of critically ill patients with COVID-19.ObjectivesThe aim was to investigate the characteristics and outcomes of critically ill patients with COVID-19 requiring intensive care unit (ICU) admission and MV.MethodsA multicentre retrospective observational cohort study at 15 hospitals in Hamburg, Germany, was performed. Critically ill adult patients with COVID-19 who completed their ICU stay between February and June 2020 were included. Patient demographics, severity of illness, and ICU course were retrospectively evaluated.ResultsA total of 223 critically ill patients with COVID-19 were included. The majority, 73% (n = 163), were men; the median age was 69 (interquartile range = 58–77.5) years, with 68% (n = 151) patients having at least one chronic medical condition. Their Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score was a median of 5 (3–9) points on admission. Overall, 167 (75%) patients needed MV. Noninvasive ventilation and high-flow nasal cannula were used in 31 (14%) and 26 (12%) patients, respectively. Subsequent MV, due to noninvasive ventilation/high-flow nasal cannula therapy failure, was necessary in 46 (81%) patients. Renal replacement therapy was initiated in 33% (n = 72) of patients, and owing to severe respiratory failure, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation was necessary in 9% (n = 20) of patients. Experimental antiviral therapy was used in 9% (n = 21) of patients. Complications during the ICU stay were as follows: septic shock (40%, n = 90), heart failure (8%, n = 17), and pulmonary embolism (6%, n = 14). The length of ICU stay was a median of 13 days (5–24), and the duration of MV was 15 days (8–25). The ICU mortality was 35% (n = 78) and 44% (n = 74) among mechanically ventilated patients.ConclusionIn this multicentre observational study of 223 critically ill patients with COVID-19, the survival to ICU discharge was 65%, and it was 56% among patients requiring MV. Patients showed high rate of septic complications during their ICU stay.     

Evaluation of the meropenem dosage and administration schedule in patients with bacteremia initial therapy

BackgroundThe standard meropenem (MEPM) regimen allowed by insurance in Japan is 0.5 g two or three times a day. Differences in dosages and administration schedules in Japan were evaluated.MethodsPatients with bacteremia for whom MEPM was used as the initial treatment at our institution between 2016 and 2021 were included. We retrospectively investigated patients classified into two groups: those treated according to severe infections (high-dose groupand others (low-dose group). After propensity score matching, we compared the probability of achieving free drug blood levels above the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) in 24 h (%fT > MIC) and outcomes.ResultsThe probability of 100% fT > MIC was significantly higher in the high-dose group (96.4% vs 74.5%, odds ratio [OR] = 0.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.2–0.4, P = < 0.001). Regarding outcomes, the 30-day mortality rate was significantly lower in the high-dose group (1.4% vs. 11.4%, OR = 8.0, 95% CI = 1.5–43.7, P = 0.019).ConclusionsTo improve outcomes in patients with bacteremia treated with MEPM, support for appropriate antimicrobial use is necessary for compliance with the dosage and administration schedule according to severe infections in initial treatment.     

Comparison of the Effect of Laryngeal Mask Airway Versus Endotracheal Tube on Airway Management in Pediatric Patients with Tonsillar Hypertrophy

PurposeThe laryngeal mask airway (LMA) has become an important choice in both routine and difficult airway management. We aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of LMA use in pediatric patients with tonsillar hypertrophy.DesignThis study was a randomized controlled trial.MethodsThe study included 100 pediatric patients who had first or second degree tonsillar hypertrophy. Pediatric patients undergoing elective laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair were randomly divided into two groups (n = 50): LMA group and the endotracheal tube (ETT) group. The primary outcomes were ventilation leak volume, peak airway pressure, and partial pressure of end-tidal carbon dioxide (P_ETco₂). Data for primary outcomes were collected before and 5-, 15-, and 25-minute after opening pneumoperitoneum, and on closing the pneumoperitoneum. Complications such as laryngospasm, bronchospasm, desaturation, severe coughing, blood on the device after removal, and sore throat were recorded.FindingsA total of 100 pediatric patients were assessed and 97 eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive an LMA (n = 49) or an ETT (n = 48). There was no statistically significant difference in ventilation leak volume and P_ETco₂ between the LMA and ETT groups (P > .05). Compared with T_1-4, peak airway pressure was significantly lower in T₀ (LMA group 12.6 ± 0.9, 95% confidence interval 12.2 to 13.0; ETT group 12.8 ± 1.2, 95% confidence interval 12.2 to 13.3; P < .05). The incidences of laryngospasm 11 (22.9%), desaturation 18 (37.5%), and severe coughing 13 (27%) were higher in the ETT group (11 [22.9%] vs 3 [6.1%], 18 [37.5%] vs 6 [12.2%], 13 [27%] vs 3 [6.1%]; P < .05).ConclusionsThe application of LMA has a lower incidence of complications. LMA as an airway device is effective and perhaps superior in appropriate patients.     

Temporal trends in clinical characteristics and in-hospital mortality among patients with COVID-19 in Japan for waves 1, 2, and 3: A retrospective cohort study

IntroductionLittle information is available on the temporal trends in the clinical epidemiology and in-hospital mortality of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Japan for waves 1, 2, and 3.MethodsA national claims database was used to analyze the time trends in admission, medical procedure, and in-hospital mortality characteristics among patients with COVID-19. Patients who were ≥18 years and discharged from January 1, 2020 to February 28, 2021 were included.ResultsA multilevel logistic regression analysis of 51,252 patients revealed a decline in mortality in waves 2 and 3 (risk-adjusted mortality range = 2.17–4.07%; relative risk reduction = 23–59%; reference month of April 2020 = 5.32%). In the subgroup analysis, a decline in mortality was also observed in patients requiring oxygen support but not mechanical ventilation (risk-adjusted mortality range = 5.98–11.68%; relative risk reduction = 22–60%; reference month of April 2020 = 15.06%). Further adjustments for medical procedure changes in the entire study population revealed a decrease in mortality in waves 2 and 3 (risk-adjusted mortality range = 2.66–4.05%; relative risk reduction = 24–50%).ConclusionsA decline in in-hospital mortality was observed in waves 2 and 3 after adjusting for patient/hospital-level characteristics and medical treatments. The reasons for this decline warrant further research to improve the outcomes of hospitalized patients.     

Potential risk factors for case fatality rate of novel coronavirus (COVID-19) in China: A pooled analysis of individual patient data

Background and objectiveSince the first case of the pneumonia caused by 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) is found in Wuhan, there have been more than 70,000 cases reported in China. This study aims to perform the meta-analysis of risk factors for the case fatality rate (CFR) of the 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19).Design and methodsWe have searched PubMed, Google scholar and medRxiv for the cohort studies involving risk factors for the CFR of COVID-19. This meta-analysis compares the risk factors of CFR between fatal patients and non-fatal patients.ResultsTwo cohort studies are included in this study. After comparing the patients between fatal cases and non-fatal cases, several important factors are found to significantly increase the CFR in patients with COVID-19, and include the age ranging 60–70 (OR = 1.85; 95% CI = 1.62 to 2.11; P < .00001) and especially≥70 (OR = 8.45; 95% CI = 7.47 to 9.55; P < .00001), sex of male (OR = 1.88; 95% CI = 1.30 to 2.73; P = .0008), occupation of retirees (OR = 4.27; 95% CI = 2.50 to 7.28; P < .00001), and severe cases (OR = 691.76; 95% CI = 4.82 to 99,265.63; P = .01). As the advancement of early diagnosis and treatment, the CFR after January 21 (or 22), 2020 is substantially decreased in COVID-19 than before (OR = 0.21; 95% CI = 0.19 to 0.24; P < .00001).ConclusionsSeveral factors are confirmed to significantly improve the CFR in patients with COVID-19, which is very important for the treatment and good prognosis of these patients.     

The effect of the severity COVID-19 infection on electrocardiography

ObjectiveAcute myocardial damage is detected in a significant portion of patients with coronavirus 2019 disease (COVID-19) infection, with a reported prevalence of 7–28%. The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between electrocardiographic findings and the indicators of the severity of COVID-19 detected on electrocardiography (ECG).MethodsA total of 219 patients that were hospitalized due to COVID-19 between April 15 and May 5, 2020 were enrolled in this study. Patients were divided into two groups according to the severity of COVID-19 infection: severe (n = 95) and non-severe (n = 124). ECG findings at the time of admission were recorded for each patient. Clinical characteristics and laboratory findings were retrieved from electronic medical records.ResultsMean age was 65.2 ± 13.8 years in the severe group and was 57.9 ± 16.0 years in the non-severe group. ST depression (28% vs. 14%), T-wave inversion (29% vs. 16%), ST-T changes (36% vs. 21%), and the presence of fragmented QRS (fQRS) (17% vs. 7%) were more frequent in the severe group compared to the non-severe group. Multivariate analysis revealed that hypertension (odds ratio [OR]: 2.42, 95% confidence interval [CI]:1.03–5.67; p = 0.041), the severity of COVID-19 infection (OR: 1.87, 95% CI: 1.09–2.65; p = 0.026), presence of cardiac injury (OR: 3.32, 95% CI: 1.45–7.60; p = 0.004), and d-dimer (OR: 3.60, 95% CI: 1.29–10.06; p = 0.014) were independent predictors of ST-T changes on ECG.ConclusionST depression, T-wave inversion, ST-T changes, and the presence of fQRS on admission ECG are closely associated with the severity of COVID-19 infection.     

Changes in diagnostic usefulness of the JRS scoring system in COVID-19 pneumonia by SARS-CoV-2 vaccination

IntroductionThe Japanese Respiratory Society (JRS) scoring system is a useful tool for the rapid presumptive diagnosis of atypical pneumonia in non-elderly (aged <60 years) patients. As SARS-CoV-2 vaccination progresses, COVID-19 in elderly people has markedly reduced. We investigated changes in diagnostic usefulness of the JRS scoring system in COVID-19 pneumonia between the Delta variant group (vaccination period) and non-Delta variant group (before the vaccination period).MethodsThis study was conducted at five institutions and assessed a total of 1121 patients with COVID-19 pneumonia (298 had the Delta variant). During the vaccination period, the Delta variant has spread and replaced the Alfa variant. We evaluated the vaccination period as the Delta variant group.ResultsAmong the six parameters of the JRS scoring system, matching rates of two parameters were higher in the Delta variant group than the non-Delta variant group (pre-vaccination period): age <60 years (77.5% vs 42.2%, P < 0.0001) and no or minor comorbid illness (69.1% vs 57.8%, p = 0.0007). The sensitivity of the diagnosis of atypical pneumonia in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia was significantly higher in the Delta variant group compared with the non-Delta variant group (80.2% vs 58.3%, p < 0.0001). When the diagnostic sensitivity was analyzed for different ages, the diagnostic sensitivities for the Delta variant and non-Delta variant groups were 92.6% and 95.5% for non-elderly patients and 39.1% and 32.5% for elderly patients, respectively.ConclusionsOur results demonstrated that the JRS scoring system is a useful tool for distinguishing between COVID-19 pneumonia and bacterial pneumonia in the COVID-19 vaccination period, but not before the vaccination period.