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 remdesivir for COVID-19 in children: A propensity-score-matched analysis

Clinical efficacy of remdesivir in children with COVID-19 is unclear. This propensity-score-matched retrospective cohort study of children with COVID-19 showed that the rate of patients achieving defervescence on Day 4 was higher in the remdesivir group than in the non-remdesivir group, but was not statistically different (86.7% vs 73.3%, P = 0.333).     

Clinical characteristics of Japanese patients with moderate to severe COVID-19

IntroductionAlthough several reports on the risk factors for severe disease of COVID-19 already exist, reports on effective early indicators are still limited, especially from Japan. This study was conducted to clarify the patient’s characteristics whose disease progressed to severe status.MethodsThe medical records of all consecutive 300 Japanese patients hospitalized at our institution between February and November 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. The clinical characteristics were evaluated to compare between mild (no oxygen needed), moderate (oxygen needs of 1–4 L/min), and severe diseases (oxygen needs of 5 L/min or more).ResultsThe median age was 68 years old, with 123 (41.0%) males and 177 (59.0%) females. Of these, 199 patients (66.3%), 55 patients (18.3%), 46 patients (15.3%) patients were in the mild disease, moderate disease, severe disease groups, respectively. Patients with severe disease were more likely to be older, have more comorbidities, and tended to have higher body mass index. In laboratory data, lymphocyte count, levels of C-reactive protein (CRP), LDH, and AST on admission were significantly associated with the severity. In multivariate analysis, age and CRP were the independent risk factors for severe disease (OR = 1.050, 1.130, respectively). The optimal cut-off value for age was 74 years old and that for CRP was 3.15 mg/dL.ConclusionsAge and CRP were independently associated with disease severity of COVID-19 in multivariate analysis. Additionally, the numbers of underlying disease, lymphocyte count, and inflammatory markers such as LDH and D-dimer may also be related to disease severity.     

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.     

Immunochromatography and chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay for COVID-19 diagnosis

IntroductionThe rapid and accurate detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is required to prevent the spread of COVID-19. This study evaluated the utility of two SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection methods.MethodsWe evaluated two types of antigen detection methods using immunochromatography (Espline) and quantitative chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay (Lumipulse). RT-PCR was performed as a standard procedure for COVID-19 diagnosis. Lumipulse and RT-PCR were performed for all 486 nasopharyngeal swabs and 136 saliva samples, and the Espline test was performed for 271 nasopharyngeal swabs and 93 saliva samples.ResultsThe sensitivity and specificity of the Espline test were 10/11 and 260/260 (100%), respectively for the nasopharyngeal swabs and 3/9 and 84/84 (100%), respectively for the saliva samples. High sensitivities for both saliva (8/9) and nasopharyngeal swabs (22/24) were observed in the Lumipulse test. The specificities of the Lumipulse test for nasopharyngeal swabs and saliva samples were 460/462 (99.6%) and 123/127 (96.9%), respectively.ConclusionThe Espline test is not effective for saliva samples but is useful for simple and rapid COVID-19 tests using nasopharyngeal swabs because it does not require special devices. The Lumipulse test is a powerful high-throughput tool for COVID-19 diagnosis because it has high detection performance for nasopharyngeal swabs and saliva samples.     

Evidence-Based Strategies for Clinical Organizations to Address COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy

The success of vaccination programs is contingent upon irrefutable scientific safety data combined with high rates of public acceptance and population coverage. Vaccine hesitancy, characterized by lack of confidence in vaccination and/or complacency about vaccination that may lead to delay or refusal of vaccination despite the availability of services, threatens to undermine the success of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination programs. The rapid pace of vaccine development, misinformation in popular and social media, the polarized sociopolitical environment, and the inherent complexities of large-scale vaccination efforts may undermine vaccination confidence and increase complacency about COVID-19 vaccination. Although the experience of recent lethal surges of COVID-19 infections has underscored the value of COVID-19 vaccines, ensuring population uptake of COVID-19 vaccination will require application of multilevel, evidence-based strategies to influence behavior change and address vaccine hesitancy. Recent survey research evaluating public attitudes in the United States toward the COVID-19 vaccine reveals substantial vaccine hesitancy. Building upon efforts at the policy and community level to ensure population access to COVID-19 vaccination, a strong health care system response is critical to address vaccine hesitancy. Drawing on the evidence base in social, behavioral, communication, and implementation science, we review, summarize, and encourage use of interpersonal, individual-level, and organizational interventions within clinical organizations to address this critical gap and improve population adoption of COVID-19 vaccination.     

Effectiveness of the third dose of BNT162b2 vaccine on neutralizing Omicron variant in the Japanese population

IntroductionThe vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 provides humoral immunity to fight COVID-19; however, the acquired immunity gradually declines. Booster vaccination restores reduced humoral immunity; however, its effect on newly emerging variants, such as the Omicron variant, is a concern. As the waves of COVID-19 cases and vaccine programs differ between countries, it is necessary to know the domestic effect of the booster.MethodsSerum samples were obtained from healthcare workers (20–69 years old) in the Pfizer BNT162b2 vaccine program at the Toyama University Hospital 6 months after the second dose (6mA2D, n = 648) and 2 weeks after the third dose (2wA3D, n = 565). The anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody level was measured, and neutralization against the wild-type and variants (Delta and Omicron) was evaluated using pseudotyped viruses. Data on booster-related events were collected using questionnaires.ResultsThe median anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody was >30.9-fold elevated after the booster (6mA2D, 710.0 U/mL [interquartile range (IQR): 443.0–1068.0 U/mL]; 2wA3D, 21927 U/mL [IQR: 15321.0–>25000.0 U/mL]). Median neutralizing activity using 100-fold sera against wild-type-, Delta-, and Omicron-derived variants was elevated from 84.6%, 36.2%, and 31.2% at 6mA2D to >99.9%, 99.1%, and 94.6% at 2wA3D, respectively. The anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels were significantly elevated in individuals with fever ≥37.5 °C, general fatigue, and myalgia, local swelling, and local hardness.ConclusionThe booster effect, especially against the Omicron variant, was observed in the Japanese population. These findings contribute to the precise understanding of the efficacy and side effects of the booster and the promotion of vaccine campaigns.     

Prevalence of thromboembolic events and status of prophylactic anticoagulant therapy in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in Japan

IntroductionOne of the most prominent and concerning complications associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is venous and arterial thromboembolisms. The aim of the present study was to delineate the prevalence of thromboembolic events and the current status of prophylactic anticoagulation therapy in patients with COVID-19 in Japan.MethodsBetween February 1 and August 31, 2020, we performed a dual-center, retrospective cohort study based on data obtained from the medical charts of COVID-19 patients admitted to healthcare facilities in Japan. The primary outcome was any thromboembolic event including pulmonary embolism (PE), deep vein thrombosis (DVT), myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke and other systemic thromboemboli.ResultsDuring the study period, we extracted 628 consecutive patients admitted for COVID-19. Prophylactic anticoagulant therapy was administered in 63 (10%) patients of whom 20 (31.7%) were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). Thromboembolic events occurred in 18 (2.9%) patients (14.3% of patients in ICU and 2.2% of patients in the general wards). DVT were detected in 13 (2.1%) patients, PE in 11 (1.8%), and both DVT and PE in 6 (0.96%) patients. An increasing prevalence in thromboembolic events was noted with progressive clinical severity. Overall in-hospital mortality was 4.8%.ConclusionsProphylactic anticoagulation therapy was administered in only 10% of all hospitalized COVID-19 patients. The prevalence of any thromboembolic events was 2.9% in COVID-19 patients with most events occurring in severe and critical patients. Therefore, prophylactic anticoagulation therapy may be warranted in severe and critical patients but in asymptomatic to moderate patients the practice remains controversial.     

Do Patients With COVID-19 Benefit from Rehabilitation? Functional Outcomes of the First 100 Patients in a COVID-19 Rehabilitation Unit

ObjectiveTo determine the benefits associated with brief inpatient rehabilitation for coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) patients.DesignRetrospective chart review.SettingA newly created specialized rehabilitation unit in a tertiary care medical center.ParticipantsConsecutive sample of patients (N=100) with COVID-19 infection admitted to rehabilitation.InterventionInpatient rehabilitation for postacute care COVID-19 patients.Main Outcome MeasuresMeasurements at admission and discharge comprised a Barthel Activities of Daily Living Index (including baseline value before COVID-19 infection), time to perform 10 sit-to-stands with associated cardiorespiratory changes, and grip strength (dynamometry). Correlations between these outcomes and the time spent in the intensive care unit (ICU) were explored.ResultsUpon admission to rehabilitation, 66% of the patients were men, the age was 66±22 years, mean delay from symptom onset was 20.4±10.0 days, body mass index was 26.0±5.4 kg/m², 49% had hypertension, 29% had diabetes, and 26% had more than 50% pulmonary damage on computed tomographic scans. The mean length of rehabilitation stay was 9.8±5.6 days. From admission to discharge, the Barthel index increased from 77.3±26.7 to 88.8±24.5 (P<.001), without recovering baseline values (94.5±16.2; P<.001). There was a 37% improvement in sit-to-stand frequency (0.27±0.16 to 0.37±0.16 Hz; P<.001), a 13% decrease in post-test respiratory rate (30.7±12.6 to 26.6±6.1; P=.03), and a 15% increase in grip strength (18.1±9.2 to 20.9±8.9 kg; P<.001). At both admission and discharge, Barthel score correlated with grip strength (ρ=0.39-0.66; P<.01), which negatively correlated with time spent in the ICU (ρ=–0.57 to –0.49; P<.05).ConclusionsInpatient rehabilitation for COVID-19 patients was associated with substantial motor, respiratory, and functional improvement, especially in severe cases, although there remained mild persistent autonomy loss upon discharge. After acute stages, COVID-19, primarily a respiratory disease, might convert into a motor impairment correlated with the time spent in intensive care.     

Leveraging the Electronic Health Record to Address the COVID-19 Pandemic

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues its global spread. Coordinated effort on a vast scale is required to halt its progression and to save lives. Electronic health record (EHR) data are a valuable resource to mitigate the COVID-19 pandemic. We review how the EHR could be used for disease surveillance and contact tracing. When linked to “omics” data, the EHR could facilitate identification of genetic susceptibility variants, leading to insights into risk factors, disease complications, and drug repurposing. Real-time monitoring of patients could enable early detection of potential complications, informing appropriate interventions and therapy. We reviewed relevant articles from PubMed, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar searches as well as preprint servers, given the rapidly evolving understanding of the COVID-19 pandemic.     

Intensive care burden of COVID-19 in tertiary care hospitals during the first year of outbreak in Kawasaki City,Japan: A retrospective cohort study

IntroductionThis study aimed to describe the changes in the intensive care burden of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) during the first year of outbreak in Japan.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study included COVID-19 patients who received mechanical ventilation (MV) support in two designated hospitals for critical patients in Kawasaki City. We compared the lengths of MV and stay in the intensive care unit (ICU) or high care unit (HCU) according to the three epidemic waves. We calculated in-hospital mortality rates in patients with or without MV.ResultsThe median age of the sample was 65.0 years, and 22.7% were women. There were 37, 29, and 62 patients in the first (W1), second (W2), and third waves (W3), respectively. Systemic steroids, remdesivir, and prone positioning were more frequent in W2 and W3. The median length of MV decreased from 18.0 days in W1 to 13.0 days in W3 (P = 0.019), and that of ICU/HCU stay decreased from 22.0 days in W1 to 15.5 days in W3 (P = 0.027). The peak daily number of patients receiving MV support was higher at 18 patients in W1, compared to 8 and 15 patients in W2 and W3, respectively. The mortality rate was 23.4%, which did not significantly change (P = 0.467).ConclusionsThe lengths of MV and ICU/HCU stay per patient decreased over time. Despite an increase in the number of COVID-19 patients who received MV in W3, this study may indicate that the intensive care burden during the study period did not substantially increase.     

Therapeutic potential of ciclesonide inhalation for COVID-19 pneumonia: Report of three cases

No specific and effective anti-viral treatment has been approved for COVID-19 so far. Systemic corticosteroid has been sometimes administered to severe infectious diseases combined with the specific treatment. However, as lack of the specific anti-SARS-CoV-2 drug, systemic steroid treatment has not been recommended for COVID-19. We report here three cases of the COVID-19 pneumonia successfully treated with ciclesonide inhalation. Rationale of the treatment is to mitigate the local inflammation with inhaled steroid that stays in the lung and to inhibit proliferation of the virus by antiviral activity. Larger and further studies are warranted to confirm the result of these cases.     

Long-Term Effects of COVID-19

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is the third deadly coronavirus infection of the 21st century that has proven to be significantly more lethal than its predecessors, with the number of infected patients and deaths still increasing daily. From December 2019 to July 2021, this virus has infected nearly 200 million people and led to more than 4 million deaths. Our understanding of COVID-19 is constantly progressing, giving better insight into the heterogeneous nature of its acute and long-term effects. Recent literature on the long-term health consequences of COVID-19 discusses the need for a comprehensive understanding of the multisystemic pathophysiology, clinical predictors, and epidemiology to develop and inform an evidence-based, multidisciplinary management approach. A PubMed search was completed using variations on the term post-acute COVID-19. Only peer-reviewed studies in English published by July 17, 2021 were considered for inclusion. All studies discussed in this text are from adult populations unless specified (as with multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children). The preliminary evidence on the pulmonary, cardiovascular, neurological, hematological, multisystem inflammatory, renal, endocrine, gastrointestinal, and integumentary sequelae show that COVID-19 continues after acute infection. Interdisciplinary monitoring with holistic management that considers nutrition, physical therapy, psychological management, meditation, and mindfulness in addition to medication will allow for the early detection of post-acute COVID-19 sequelae symptoms and prevent long-term systemic damage. This review serves as a guideline for effective management based on current evidence, but clinicians should modify recommendations to reflect each patient's unique needs and the most up-to-date evidence. The presence of long-term effects presents another reason for vaccination against COVID-19.     

An epidemiological evaluation of COVID-19 in La paz,Bolivia

IntroductionThe Plurinational State of Bolivia (Bolivia) has experienced four major waves of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) so far. Although the ministry of health has been tracking morbidity and mortality through each wave, epidemiology of COVID-19 in Bolivia is not well defined, despite a need for more accurate measurement of the number of cases and deaths to allow for forecasting of the pandemic. This study examined prevalence of COVID-19 at community level, determinants of its occurrence and vaccine effectiveness.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study in La Paz city on 2,775 individuals between March 2020 and February 2022. A structured questionnaire was used to collect data on COVID-19 morbidity, mortality and vaccination status.ResultsOf the 2,775 participants, 1,586 (57.1%) were infected with COVID-19, and 187 (6.7%) were suspected cases. The mortality rate was 2.9%. Sinopharm, Johnson & Johnson, Gamaleya, Pfizer-BioNtech, Moderna and AstraZeneka vaccines are in use, and all vaccines have demonstrated effectiveness in reducing the risk of onset. Risk for mortality was significantly lower in the vaccinated group with an odds ratio of 0.037 (95％ confidential interval: 0.01–0.10, p-value: <0.001).ConclusionsActual prevalence of COVID-19 in La Paz (the prevalence rate: 63.8%, including suspected case) was higher than that reported by the Ministry of Health and Sports in Bolivia (7.5%). In addition, vaccination has contributed significantly to the control of the COVID-19 epidemic in Bolivia. We believe that our report will be useful for COVID-19 prevention strategies in Bolivia for the future.     

Arterial Thrombotic Events in Adult Inpatients With COVID-19

ObjectiveTo evaluate the clinical course of and risk factors for arterial thrombotic events in adult inpatients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).MethodsAll consecutive adult patients admitted for COVID-19 infection in a referral center in France and discharged from the hospital between April 1 and April 30, 2020, were included. All arterial thrombotic events that occurred through discharge were considered for analysis. Epidemiologic, demographic, clinical, laboratory, treatment, and outcome data were extracted from electronic medical records with use of a standardized data collection form.ResultsOverall, 531 COVID-19+ patients were analyzed. Among them, 30 (5.6%) experienced arterial thrombotic events. Arterial thrombotic events in the setting of COVID-19 infection happened at a median of 11 (5-20) days after the first symptoms of infection; occurred in high-risk patients according to traditional cardiovascular risk factors; had an atypical pattern, such as thrombosis of the aorta, upper limb, or renal arteries or cerebral microvasculopathy in 7 (23.3%) cases; and were associated with an in-hospital mortality rate of 40%. Arterial thrombotic events increased the risk of death by 3-fold in COVID-19+ patients (hazard ratio, 2.96; 95% CI, 1.4 to 4.7; P=.002). A subdistribution survival hazard model showed that a concentration of D-dimer above 1250 ng/mL increased the risk of arterial thrombotic events in COVID-19+ patients by more than 7 (subdistribution hazard ratio, 7.68; 95% CI, 2.9 to 20.6; P<.001).ConclusionA dramatically high rate of in-hospital death was observed in patients who suffered arterial thrombotic events in the setting of COVID-19 infection. A D-dimer level above 1250 ng/mL at entry may identify COVID-19+ patients at risk for arterial thrombotic events.     

Safety of and antibody response to the BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine in adolescents and young adults with underlying disease

BackgroundData are limited regarding the safety of and antibody response to the BNT162b2 severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) messenger ribonucleic acid vaccine in adolescents and young adults with underlying disease.MethodsThis prospective observational study enrolled patients age 12–25 years with chronic underlying disease who received 2 doses of BNT162b2. A 18-item questionnaire was used to assess adverse events within 7 days post-vaccination, and data regarding severe adverse events were collected from electronic medical records. An antibody titer for the receptor-binding domain of the spike protein in SARS-CoV-2 was used to assess antibody response after the second vaccine dose.ResultsStudy participants were 429 patients (241 [56.2%] age 12–15 years; 188 [43.8%] age 16–25 years). The most common underlying diseases were genetic or chromosomal abnormalities and/or congenital anomalies, followed by endocrine or metabolic diseases; 32% of participants were immunocompromised. Severe adverse events were observed after the second dose in 1 (0.4%) patient age 12–15 years and in 2 (1.1%) patients age 16–25 years; all patients recovered. Seropositivity after the second vaccine dose was 99.0%. The geometric mean antibody titer was higher in patients age 12–15 years versus 16–25 years (1603.3 [1321.8–1944.7] U/mL vs. 949.4 [744.2–1211.0] U/mL). Compared with immunocompetent patients, immunocompromised patients had a lower antibody titer (2106.8 [1917.5–2314.7] U/mL vs. 467.9 [324.4–674.8] U/mL).ConclusionsVaccination with BNT162b2 was acceptably safe and immunogenic for adolescents and young adults with underlying disease.