Clinical outcomes of COVID-19 treated with remdesivir across the continuum of care

Introduction

During the early phase of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), remdesivir was only approved for hospitalized patients. Our institution developed hospital-based, outpatient infusion centers for selected hospitalized patients with COVID-19 who had clinical improvement to allow for early dismissal. The outcomes of patients who transitioned to complete remdesivir in the outpatient setting were examined.

Methods

Retrospective study of all hospitalized adult patients with COVID-19 who received at least one dose of remdesivir from November 6, 2020, to November 5, 2021, at one of the Mayo Clinic hospitals.

Results

Among 3029 hospitalized patients who received treatment with remdesivir for COVID-19, the majority (89.5%) completed the recommended 5-day course. Among them, 2169 (80%) patients completed treatment during hospitalization, whereas 542 (20.0%) patients were dismissed to complete remdesivir in outpatient infusion centers. Patients who completed the treatment in the outpatient setting had lower odds of death within 28 days (aOR 0.14, 95% CI 0.06–0.32, p < 0.001). However, their rate of subsequent hospital encounters within 30 days was higher (aHR 1.88, 95% CI 1.27–2.79, p = 0.002). Among patients treated with remdesivir only in the inpatient setting, the adjusted odds of death within 28 days were significantly higher among those who did not complete the 5-day course of remdesivir (aOR 2.07, 95% CI 1.45–2.95, p < 0.001).

Conclusions

This study describes the clinical outcomes of a strategy of transitioning remdesivir therapy from inpatient to outpatient among selected patients. Mortality was lower among patients who completed the 5-day course of remdesivir.     

The association between nutrients and occurrence of COVID-19 outcomes in the population of Western Iran: A cohort study

Introduction

The study aimed to determine the association between nutrients (micronutrients, macronutrients, and antioxidants) and the occurrence of COVID-19-related outcomes (morbidity and hospitalization) using a cohort study in Western Iran.

Methods

The basic study information was collected from February 2019 to February 2020 from the baseline phase of the Dehgolan Prospective Cohort Study (DehPCS). The primary outcomes in this study included risk of contracting COVID-19 and hospitalization due to it at a specific time. To compare these outcomes based on different nutritional groups (macronutrients or micronutrients), Kaplan–Meier chart and log rank test were used. Also, univariate and multivariate regression models were used to investigate the association between different nutritional groups and desired outcomes (risk of contracting COVID-19 and hospitalization due to it at a certain time).

Results

The results showed that people having an insufficient intake of selenium (HR: 1.180; % 95 CI: 1.032–2.490; P: 0.042), vitamin A (HR: 1.119; % 95 CI: 1.020–1.442; p: 0.033), and vitamin E (HR: 1.544; % 95 CI: 1.136–3.093; p: 0.039) were significantly more infected with COVID-19 than the ones who had a sufficient intake of these nutrients. Also, the results showed that people having an insufficient intake of selenium (HR: 2.130; % 95 CI: 1.232–3.098; p: 0.018) and vitamin A (HR: 1.200; % 95 CI: 1.000–2.090; p: 0.043) were significantly hospitalized more than the ones who had a sufficient intake of these nutrients.

Conclusion

Insufficient intake of selenium and vitamins A and E can significantly increase the incidence of COVID-19 and hospitalization due to it.     

Risk factors for severe infection and mortality In patients with COVID-19 in patients with multiple myeloma and AL amyloidosis

Patients with multiple myeloma (MM) have a lower efficacy from COVID-19 vaccination and a high rate of mortality from COVID-19 in hospitalized patients. However, the overall rate and severity of COVID-19 infection in all settings (including non-hospitalized patients) and the independent impact of plasma cell-directed therapies on outcomes needs further study. We reviewed the medical records of 9225 patients with MM or AL amyloidosis (AL) seen at Mayo Clinic Rochester, Arizona, and Florida between 12/01/2019 and 8/31/2021 and identified 187 patients with a COVID-19 infection (n = 174 MM, n = 13 AL). The infection rate in our cohort was relatively low at 2% but one-fourth of the COVID-19 infections were severe. Nineteen (10%) patients required intensive care unit (ICU) admission and 5 (3%) patients required mechanical ventilation. The mortality rate among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 was 22% (16/72 patients). Among patients that were fully vaccinated at the time of infection (n = 12), two (17%) developed severe COVID-19 infection, without any COVID-related death. On multivariable analysis, treatment with CD38 antibody within 6 months of COVID-19 infection [Risk ratio (RR) 3.6 (95% CI: 1.2, 10.5), p = .02], cardiac [RR 4.1 (95% CI: 1.3, 12.4), p = .014] or pulmonary comorbidities [RR 3.6 (95% CI 1.1, 11.6); p = .029] were independent predictors for ICU admission. Cardiac comorbidity [RR 2.6 (95% CI: 1.1, 6.5), p = .038] was an independent predictor of mortality whereas MM/AL in remission was associated with lower mortality [RR 0.4 (95% CI: 0.2–0.8); p = .008].     

Safety,tolerability and efficacy of up-titration of guideline-directed medical therapies for acute heart failure in elderly patients: A sub-analysis of the STRONG-HF randomized clinical trial

Aims

STRONG-HF examined a high-intensity care (HIC) strategy of rapid up-titration of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) and close follow-up after acute heart failure (AHF) admission. We assess the role of age on efficacy and safety of HIC.

Methods and results

Hospitalized AHF patients, not treated with optimal GDMT were randomized to HIC or usual care. The primary endpoint of 180-day death or HF readmission occurred equally in older (>65 years, n = 493, 74 ± 5 years) and younger patients (53 ± 11 years, adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.73–1.43, p = 0.89). Older patients received slightly lower GDMT to day 21, but same doses at day 90 and 180. The effect of HIC on the primary endpoint was numerically higher in younger (aHR 0.51, 95% CI 0.32–0.82) than older patients (aHR 0.73, 95% CI 0.46–1.15, adjusted interaction p = 0.30), partially related to COVID-19 deaths. After exclusion of COVID-19 deaths, the effect of HIC was similar in younger (aHR 0.51, 95% CI 0.32–0.82) and older patients (aHR 0.63, 95% CI 0.32–1.02, adjusted interaction p = 0.56), with no treatment-by-age interaction (interaction p = 0.57). HIC induced larger improvements in quality of life to day 90 in younger (EQ-VAS adjusted-mean difference 5.51, 95% CI 3.20–7.82) than in older patients (1.77, 95% CI −0.75 to 4.29, interaction p = 0.032). HIC was associated with similar rates of adverse events in older and younger patients.

Conclusion

High-intensity care after AHF was safe and resulted in a significant reduction of all-cause death or HF readmission at 180 days across the study age spectrum. Older patients have smaller benefits in terms of quality of life.     

COVID-19 is associated with increased care needs and a decreased likelihood of returning home following a hip fracture: The IMPACT frailty study

Purpose

The primary aim was to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on frailty in patients surviving a hip fracture. Secondary aims were to assess impact of COVID-19 on (i) length of stay (LoS) and post-discharge care needs, (ii) readmissions, and (iii) likelihood of returning to own home.

Methods

This propensity score-matched case-control study was conducted in a single centre between 01/03/20–30/11/21. A ‘COVID-positive’ group of 68 patients was matched to 141 ‘COVID-negative’ patients. ‘Index’ and ‘current’ Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) scores were assigned for frailty at admission and at follow-up. Data were extracted from validated records and included: demographics, injury factors, COVID-19 status, delirium status, discharge destination, and readmissions. For subgroup analysis controlling for vaccination availability, the periods 1 March 2020–30 November 2020 and 1 February 2021–30 November 2021 were considered pre-/post-vaccine periods.

Results

Median age was 83.0 years, 155/209 (74.2%) were female and median follow-up was 479 days (interquartile range [IQR] 311). There was an equivalent median increase in CFS in both groups (+1.00 [IQR 1.00–2.00, p = 0.472]). However, adjusted analysis demonstrated COVID-19 was independently associated with a greater magnitude change (Beta coefficient [β] 0.27, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.00–0.54, p = 0.05). COVID-19 in the post-vaccine availability period was associated with a smaller increase versus pre-vaccine (β −0.64, 95% CI −1.20 to −0.09, p = 0.023). COVID-19 was independently associated with increased acute LoS (β 4.40, 95% CI 0.22–8.58, p = 0.039), total LoS (β 32.87, 95% CI 21.42–44.33, p < 0.001), readmissions (β 0.71, 95% CI 0.04–1.38, p = 0.039), and a four-fold increased likelihood of pre-fracture home-dwelling patients failing to return home (odds ratio 4.52, 95% CI 2.08–10.34, p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Hip fracture patients that survived a COVID-19 infection had increased frailty, longer LoS, more readmissions, and higher care needs. The health and social care burden is likely to be higher than prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings should inform prognostication, discharge-planning, and service design to meet the needs of these patients.     

A UK nationwide study of adults admitted to hospital with diabetic ketoacidosis or hyperosmolar hyperglycaemic state and COVID-19

Aims

To investigate characteristics of people hospitalized with coronavirus-disease-2019 (COVID-19) and diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) or hyperosmolar hyperglycaemic state (HHS), and to identify risk factors for mortality and intensive care admission.

Materials and methods

Retrospective cohort study with anonymized data from the Association of British Clinical Diabetologists nationwide audit of hospital admissions with COVID-19 and diabetes, from start of pandemic to November 2021. The primary outcome was inpatient mortality. DKA and HHS were adjudicated against national criteria. Age-adjusted odds ratios were calculated using logistic regression.

Results

In total, 85 confirmed DKA cases, and 20 HHS, occurred among 4073 people (211 type 1 diabetes, 3748 type 2 diabetes, 114 unknown type) hospitalized with COVID-19. Mean (SD) age was 60 (18.2) years in DKA and 74 (11.8) years in HHS (p < .001). A higher proportion of patients with HHS than with DKA were of non-White ethnicity (71.4% vs 39.0% p = .038). Mortality in DKA was 36.8% (n = 57) and 3.8% (n = 26) in type 2 and type 1 diabetes respectively. Among people with type 2 diabetes and DKA, mortality was lower in insulin users compared with non-users [21.4% vs. 52.2%; age-adjusted odds ratio 0.13 (95% CI 0.03-0.60)]. Crude mortality was lower in DKA than HHS (25.9% vs. 65.0%, p = .001) and in statin users versus non-users (36.4% vs. 100%; p = .035) but these were not statistically significant after age adjustment.

Conclusions

Hospitalization with COVID-19 and adjudicated DKA is four times more common than HHS but both associate with substantial mortality. There is a strong association of previous insulin therapy with survival in type 2 diabetes-associated DKA.     

Clotting factor activity levels and bleeding risk in people with haemophilia playing sports

Background

Improved treatment options for people with haemophilia (PWH) have increased the possibilities for sports participation, but the risk of sports-induced bleeding (SIB) is still considered considerable by many.

Aim

To assess sports associated injury- and bleeding risk in PWH and to assess clotting levels associated with safe sports participation.

Methods

Sports injuries and SIBs were prospectively collected for 12 months in PWH aged 6–49 without inhibitors playing sports at least once weekly. Injuries were compared according to factor levels, severity, joint health, sports risk category and sports intensity. Factor activity at the time of injury was estimated using a pharmacokinetic model.

Results

125 participants aged 6–49 (41 children, 90% haemophilia A; 48% severe, 95% severe on prophylaxis) were included. Sports injuries were reported by 51 participants (41%). Most participants (62%) reported no bleeds at all and only 16% reported SIBs. SIBs were associated with factor levels at time of injury (OR: 0.93/%factor level (CI 0.88–0.99); p = .02), but not with haemophilia severity (OR: 0.62 (CI 0.20–1.89); p = .40), joint health, sports risk category or sports intensity. PWH with factor levels <10% during sports injury had a bleeding risk of 41% versus 20% in those with higher (>10%) factor levels.

Conclusion

The results of this study emphasize the importance of clotting factor levels in prevention of bleeds. This information is vital for patient counselling and tailoring prophylactic treatment with clotting factors and non-replacement therapy.     

Safety and efficacy of prophylactic anticoagulation versus therapeutic anticoagulation in hospital-admitted COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

COVID-19 disease-related coagulopathy and thromboembolic complication, an important aspect of the disease pathophysiology, are frequent and associated with poor outcomes, particularly significant in hospitalized patients. Undoubtedly, anticoagulation forms a cornerstone for the management of hospitalized COVID-19 patients, but the appropriate dosing has been inconclusive and a subject of research. We aim to review existing literature and compare safety and efficacy outcomes of prophylactic and therapeutic dose anticoagulation in such patients.

Methods

We did a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of prophylactic dose anticoagulation when compared with therapeutic dosing in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. We searched PubMed, Google Scholar, EMBASE and COCHRANE databases from 2019 to 2021, without any restriction by language. We screened records, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias in the studies. RCTs that directly compare therapeutic and prophylactic anticoagulants dosing and are not placebo-controlled trials were included. Analyses of data were conducted using the Mantel–Haenszel random-effects model (DerSimonian–Laird analysis). The study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021265948).

Results

We included three studies in the final quantitative analysis. The incidence of thromboembolic events in therapeutic anticoagulation was lower in comparison with prophylactic anticoagulation in hospitalized COVID-19 patients and reached statistical significance [RR 1·45, 95% CI (1.07, 1.97) I² –0%], whereas major bleeding as an adverse event was found lower in prophylactic anticoagulation in comparison with therapeutic anticoagulation that was statistically significant [RR 0·42, 95% CI(0.19, 0.93) I² –0%].

Conclusion

Our study shows that therapeutic dose anticoagulation is more effective in preventing thromboembolic events than prophylactic dose but significantly increases the risk of major bleeding as an adverse event. So, the risk–benefit ratio must be considered while using either of them.     

The Prevalence of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) and Outcomes in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19—A Study Based on Data from the Polish National Hospital Register

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a serious complication of COVID-19. This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of ARDS among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Poland as well as to characterize clinical outcomes in patients hospitalized with COVID-19-associated ARDS. This is a retrospective, secondary analysis of epidemiological data from 116,539 discharge reports on patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Poland between March and December 2020. The overall prevalence of ARDS was 3.6%, respectively 2.9% among females, and 4.4% among males (p < 0.001). Of the 4237 patients hospitalized with COVID-19-associated ARDS, 3764 deaths were reported (88.8%). Participants aged 60 years and over had more than three times higher odds of COVID-19-associated ARDS. Men had higher odds of COVID-19-associated ARDS than women (OR = 1.55; 95% CI: 1.45–1.65; p < 0.001). Patients with COVID-19 and diabetes had higher odds of COVID-19-associated ARDS (OR = 1.16; 95% CI: 1.03–1.30; p = 0.01). Among patients with COVID-19-associated ARDS, older age, male sex (OR = 1.27; 95% CI: 1.03–1.56; p = 0.02), and presence of cardiovascular diseases (OR = 1.26; 95% CI: 1.00–1.59; p = 0.048) were significantly associated with the risk of in-hospital death. Among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Poland, the prevalence of ARDS was relatively low, but the in-hospital mortality rate in patients with COVID-19-associated ARDS was higher compared to other EU countries.     

Cancer development in patients hospitalized with systemic lupus erythematosus: A population-level data linkage study

Aim

To explore the association between systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) with the risk of cancer development and subsequent 5-year mortality in Western Australia (WA).

Methods

Population-level, data linkage study of SLE patients (n = 2111) and general population comparators (n = 21 110) hospitalized between 1980 and 2014. SLE patients (identified by ICD-9-CM: 695.4, 710.0, and ICD-10-AM: L93.0, M32.0) were nearest matched (10:1) for age, sex, Aboriginality, and temporality. Follow up was from time zero (index SLE hospitalization) to cancer development, death or 31 December 2014. We assessed the risk of cancer development and subsequent 5-year mortality between SLE patients and comparators with univariate and multivariate-adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression models.

Results

SLE patients had similar multivariate-adjusted risk (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.93–1.15; p = .583) of cancer development. Cancer development risk was higher in SLE patients <40 years old (aHR 1.58, 95% CI 1.29–1.94; p < .001), and from 1980 to 1999 (aHR 1.16, 95% CI 1.02–1.31; p < .001). SLE patients had higher risk of developing cancer of the oropharynx (aHR 2.13, 95% CI 1.30–3.50), vulvo-vagina (aHR 3.22, 95% CI 1.34–7.75), skin (aHR 1.20, 95% CI 1.01–1.43), musculoskeletal tissues (aHR 2.26, 95% CI 1.16–4.40), and hematological tissues (aHR 1.78 95% CI 1.25–2.53), all p < .05. After cancer development, SLE patients had increased risk of 5-year mortality (aHR 1.31, 95% CI 1.06–1.61); highest in patients <50 years old (aHR 2.03, 95% CI 1.03–4.00), and in those with reproductive system and skin cancers.

Conclusions

Hospitalized SLE patients had increased risk of multiple cancer sub-types. Following cancer development, SLE patients had increased risk of 5-year mortality. There is scope to improve cancer prevention and surveillance in SLE patients.

Trial registration

Not applicable. This low-risk risk study used de-identified administrative linked health data.     

Comparison of clinical outcomes,demographic, and laboratory characteristics of hospitalized COVID-19 patients during major three waves driven by Alpha,Delta, and Omicron variants in Tehran,Iran

Introduction

This study is the first study in which demographic, laboratory data, and outcomes of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) patients due to the circulating SARS-CoV-2 infections caused by different variants (Alpha, Delta, and Omicron) are compared in Iran.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective study of confirmed hospitalized COVID-19 cases from April 9, 2021, to May 22, 2022. Demographic data and laboratory findings were extracted from patients' electronic medical records on the first day of admission to the hospital. All patients were followed up for outcomes related to COVID-19 including intensive care unit (ICU) admission and mortality rate.

Results

Of 760 confirmed hospitalized COVID-19 cases, 362, 298, and 100 represented patients during waves 4–6, respectively. During the Omicron wave, hospitalized patients were older than the other two waves and had a lower median level of C-reactive protein (CRP), alanine transaminase (ALT), aspartate transaminase (AST), and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR). The median length of hospital stay during waves 4–6 was 5 days (interquartile range [IQR]: 4.0–8.0), 7 days (IQR: 6.0–11), and 6 days (IQR: 5.0–9.0), respectively (p < 0.001). The rate of ICU admission during waves 4–6 significantly increased.

Conclusions

Although the Omicron variant caused less severe disease, in older patients who were hospitalized due to Omicron infection, longer hospital and ICU stays were reported, which could be attributed to their old age. In particular, elderly patients are more vulnerable to severe COVID-19; otherwise, as expected, other laboratory parameters and clinical outcomes were in accordance with differences in pathogenicity and infectivity of these variants.     

Post-traumatic Stress Disorder Among COVID-19 Survivors at 3-Month Follow-up After Hospital Discharge

BackgroundPost-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a severe but treatable mental disorder that develops after a life-threatening traumatic event. Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) hospitalisation is a potentially traumatic experience, especially in severe cases. Furthermore, the unprecedented context of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic, with daily media bombardment about COVID-19 mortality, may have amplified life-threatening perception also in patients with moderate infection. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence and risk factors of PTSD at 3-month follow-up in patients hospitalised for COVID-19 infection.DesignIn this cohort follow-up study conducted in a large Italian academic COVID-19 hospital, 115 recruited survivors were contacted by telephone 3 months after discharge to home care. The Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for DSM-5 was administered. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to analyse risk factors for the development of PTSD.Key ResultsA total of 10.4% of the sample received a PCL-5-based diagnosis of PTSD. Other 8.6% of the sample received a diagnosis of subthreshold PTSD, which leads to significant levels of distress and impairment. Multivariate regression analysis indicated that previous psychiatric diagnosis (odds ratio (OR) = 6.3, 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.7–78.6, p < 0.001) and obesity (OR = 3.51, 95% CI: 1.4–857.9, p = 0.03) were risk factors for developing PTSD. Chronic pulmonary diseases approached significance as a risk factor (OR = 6.03, 95% CI: 1.0–37.1, p = 0.053). Male sex was a protective factor (OR=0.04, 95% CI: 0.0–0.041, p = 0.007).ConclusionsPTSD and subthreshold PTSD rates in patients hospitalised for COVID-19 are worrying. Female sex and pre-existing mental disorders are established risk factors for PTSD, while the prospective association with obesity needs further investigation. Clinicians treating COVID-19 should consider screening for PTSD at follow-up assessments in patients discharged from the hospital.KEY WORDS: post-traumatic stress disorder, COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, mental health, hospitalisation     

The risk of venous thromboembolism and blood hyperlactatemia is associated with increased mortality among critically ill patients with Covid-19

Introduction

Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) following venous thromboembolism (VTE) and blood hyperlactatemia are associated with higher mortality. However, reliable biomarkers for this association remain to be elucidated. This study investigated the associations of VTE risk and blood hyperlactatemia with mortality among critically ill Covid-19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU).

Methods

In this single-centre retrospective study, we included 171 patients aged ≥18 years with confirmed Covid-19 admitted to the ICU at a tertiary healthcare clinic in the Eastern region of Saudi Arabia between 1 March 2020 and 31 January 2021. Patients were divided into two groups: survivor and non-survivor. The survivors have been identified as the patients discharged from the ICU alive. The VTE risk was defined using a Padua prediction score (PPS) >4. The blood lactate concentration (BLC) cut-off value >2 mmol/L was used to determine the blood hyperlactatemia.

Results

Multi-factor Cox analysis showed that PPS >4 and BLC >2 mmol/L were more likely to be significantly associated with higher odds of ICU mortality in critically ill Covid-19 patients (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.00–8.08, p = 0.050; HR = 3.87, 95% CI = 1.12–13.45, p = 0.033, respectively). The Area under the Curve for VTE and blood hyperlactatemia were 0.62 and 0.85, respectively.

Conclusion

VTE risk and blood hyperlactatemia have been associated with a higher mortality risk in critically ill Covid-19 patients who are hospitalized in the ICU in Saudi Arabia. According to our findings, these people needed more effective VTE prevention strategies based on a personalized assessment of their risk of bleeding. Moreover, persons without diabetes and other groups with a high risk of dying from COVID-19 may be recognized by measuring glucose as having elevated glucose and lactate jointly.     

Diabetes as a risk factor for greater COVID-19 severity and in-hospital death: A meta-analysis of observational studies

AimsTo estimate the prevalence of established diabetes and its association with the clinical severity and in-hospital mortality associated with COVID-19.Data synthesisWe systematically searched PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science, from 1st January 2020 to 15th May 2020, for observational studies of patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19. Meta-analysis was performed using random-effects modeling. A total of 83 eligible studies with 78,874 hospitalized patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 were included. The pooled prevalence of established diabetes was 14.34% (95% CI 12.62–16.06%). However, the prevalence of diabetes was higher in non-Asian vs. Asian countries (23.34% [95% CI 16.40–30.28] vs. 11.06% [95% CI 9.73–12.39]), and in patients aged ≥60 years vs. those aged <60 years (23.30% [95% CI 19.65–26.94] vs. 8.79% [95% CI 7.56–10.02]). Pre-existing diabetes was associated with an approximate twofold higher risk of having severe/critical COVID-19 illness (n = 22 studies; random-effects odds ratio 2.10, 95% CI 1.71–2.57; I² = 41.5%) and ~threefold increased risk of in-hospital mortality (n = 15 studies; random-effects odds ratio 2.68, 95% CI 2.09–3.44; I² = 46.7%). Funnel plots and Egger's tests did not reveal any significant publication bias.ConclusionsPre-existing diabetes is significantly associated with greater risk of severe/critical illness and in-hospital mortality in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19.     

Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist initiation during admission is associated with improved outcomes irrespective of ejection fraction in patients with acute heart failure

Aims

Heart failure (HF) guidelines recommend initiation and optimization of guideline-directed medical therapy, including mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs), before hospital discharge. However, scientific evidence for this recommendation is lacking. Our objective was to determine whether initiation of MRA prior to hospital discharge is associated with improved outcomes.

Methods and results

We performed a secondary analysis of 6197 patients enrolled in the RELAX-AHF-2 study. Patients were divided into four groups according to MRA therapy at baseline and discharge. At baseline 30% of patients received MRA therapy, which increased to 50% of patients at discharge. In-hospital initiation of an MRA was observed in 1690 (27%) patients, 1438 (23%) patients remained on MRA therapy, 418 (7%) patients discontinued MRA treatment, and 2651 (43%) patients did not receive an MRA during hospital stay. Compared with patients who did not receive MRA therapy, in-hospital initiation of an MRA was independently associated with lower risks of mortality (multivariable hazard ratio [HR] 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.60–0.96; p = 0.02), cardiovascular death (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.59–1.01; p = 0.06), hospitalization for HF or renal failure (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.60–0.86; p = 0.0003) and the composite endpoint of cardiovascular death and/or rehospitalization for HF or renal failure (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.61–0.83; p < 0.0001) at 180 days. These results were independent of baseline left ventricular ejection fraction.

Conclusion

In patients hospitalized for acute HF, in-hospital initiation of an MRA was associated with improved post-discharge outcomes, independent of left ventricular ejection fraction and other potential confounders.     

Abnormal liver tests and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease predict disease progression and outcome of patients with COVID-19

Background and aimsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a serious public health issue that became rapidly pandemic. Liver injury and comorbidities, including metabolic syndrome, are associated with severe forms of the disease. This study sought to investigate liver injury, clinical features, and risk factors in patients with mild, moderate, and severe COVID-19.MethodsWe retrospectively included all consecutive patients hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 between February, 22 and May 15, 2020 at the emergency rooms of a French tertiary hospital. Medical history, symptoms, biological and imaging data were collected.ResultsAmong the 1381 hospitalizations for COVID-19, 719 patients underwent liver tests on admission and 496 (68.9%) patients displayed abnormal liver tests. Aspartate aminotransferase was most commonly abnormal in 57% of cases, followed by gamma-glutamyl transferase, alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, and total bilirubin in 56.5%, 35.9%, 18.4%, 11.4%, and 5.8%. The presence of hepatocellular type more than 2xULN was associated with a higher risk of hospitalization and a worse course of severe disease (odd ratio [OR] 5.599; 95%CI: 1.27–23.86; p = 0.021; OR 3.404; 95% CI: 2.12–5.47; p < 0.001, respectively). A higher NAFLD fibrosis score was associated with a higher risk of hospitalization (OR 1.754; 95%CI: 1.27–2.43, p < 0.001). In multivariate analyses, patients with high fibrosis-4 index had a 3-fold greater risk of severe disease (p < 0.001).ConclusionAbnormal liver tests are common in patients with COVID-19 and could predict the outcome. Patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and liver fibrosis are at higher risk of progressing to severe COVID-19.     

Hepatocellular liver injury in hospitalized patients affected by COVID-19: Presence of different risk factors at different time points

BackgroundPrevalence and clinical impact of increased liver function tests in patients affected by Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is controversial.AimsThis observational study evaluates the prevalence of transaminases elevation in hospitalized patients affected by COVID-19 and investigates the presence of factors associated with hepatocellular injury and with mortality.MethodsData of 292 adult patients with confirmed COVID-19 admitted to the Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale (Switzerland) were retrospectively analyzed.ResultsTransaminases were increased in about one-third of patients on hospital admission and two-thirds of patients during the hospital stay. On hospital admission, transaminases were more commonly elevated in younger patients, who also reported elevated C reactive protein and a higher degree of respiratory failure. Independent factors associated with abnormal transaminases during hospitalization were drugs, in particular paracetamol (OR=2.67; 95% CI=1.38–5.18; p = 0.004) and remdesivir (OR=5.16; 95% CI=1.10–24.26; p = 0.04). Mortality was independently associated to age (OR = 1.09; 95% CI=1.05–1.13; p<0.001), admission to intensive care unit (OR=5.22; 95% CI=2.28–11.90; p<0.001) and alkaline phosphatase peak (OR=1.01; 95% CI=1.00- 1.01; p = 0.01).ConclusionsOn hospital admission, factors associated with liver damage were linked to demographic and clinical characteristics (age, inflammation and hypoxia) while, during hospitalization, drug treatment was related to development and progression of hepatocellular damage. Mortality was associated with alkaline phosphate peak value.     

COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among people living with HIV: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

To assess coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine acceptance among people living with HIV (PLHIV) worldwide.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE, PSYINFO, CINHAL, Scopus and EMBASE databases and other sources including free Google search and subject-specific journals from January 2020 to September 2021. The study population included adults (aged 18+ years) living with HIV and evaluated for COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. A random effect meta-analysis model was used to estimate the pooled COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rate. Subgroup analyses were performed, and factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy underwent narrative analysis. Of 558 initial records, 14 studies were eligible for review.

Results

The overall pooled COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rate among adult PLHIV was 62% (95% confidence interval [CI], 56%–69%). In subgroup analysis, the estimated pooled COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rate was higher in high-income countries: 63% (95% CI, 55%–70%) versus 62% (95% CI, 54%–71%) in low- and middle-income countries, and in studies conducted in 2022 (66% [95% CI, 58%–75%]) than in studies conducted in 2021 (57% [95% CI, 47%–68%]). Reasons for lower COVID-19 vaccine acceptance included higher monthly income, being non-homosexual, history of chronic disease, COVID-19-related medical mistrust, not knowing anyone who died of COVID-19, believing oneself to be immune to COVID-19, general vaccine refusal, negative attitude to the vaccine, concerns about efficacy, safety and side effects, distrust in common sources of vaccine-related information and using social media as a source of information on COVID-19.

Conclusion

Among PLHIV, acceptance of COVID-19 vaccine is generally low. A greater emphasis on collaborative efforts between all concerned bodies is needed to boost vaccine acceptance in this population.     

Incidence and predictors of 30-day and 6-month stroke after TAVR: Insights from the multicenter OBSERVANT II study

Background

The incidence and predictors of 30-day stroke after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) were derived from early studies investigating first-generation devices. The incidence of 6-month stroke and its related predictors are unknown.

Aims

To investigate the incidence and to identify procedural and patient-related predictors of 30-day and 6-month stroke after TAVR.

Methods

Data from 2753 consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR were obtained from the OBSERVANT-II study, an observational, prospective, multicenter cohort study. The study endpoints were symptomatic 30-day and 6-month stroke after TAVR.

Results

The occurrence of a 30-day and 6-month stroke was low (1.3% and 2.4%, respectively) but with significant impact on survival. Aortic valve predilatation (odds ratio [OR]: 2.28, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.12–4.65, p = 0.023), diabetes (OR: 3.10, 95% CI: 1.56–6.18, p = 0.001), and left ventricle ejection fraction < 50% (OR: 2.15, 95% CI: 1.04–4.47, p = 0.04) were independent predictors of 30-day stroke, whereas diabetes (sub-distribution hazard ratio [SHR]: 2.07, 95% CI: 1.25–3.42, p = 0.004), pre-existing neurological dysfunction (SHR: 3.92, 95% CI: 1.54–10, p = 0.004), bicuspid valve (SHR: 4.75, 95% CI: 1.44–15.7, p = 0.011), and critical status (SHR: 3.05, 95% CI: 1.21–7.72, p = 0.018) were predictive of 6-month stroke. Conversely, antiplatelet therapy and anticoagulation were protective factors at both 30 days and 6 months.

Conclusions

Stroke after TAVR was rare. Predilatation was the only procedural factor predictive of 30-day stroke, whereas the remaining were patient-related risk factors, suggesting appropriate risk stratification preoperatively.     

The Relationship of COVID-19 Vaccination with Mortality Among 86,732 Hospitalized Patients: Subpopulations,Patient Factors,and Changes over Time

BackgroundInformation on COVID-19 vaccination effects on mortality among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 could inform vaccination outreach efforts and increase understanding of patient risk.ObjectiveDetermine the associations of vaccination status with mortality in adult patients hospitalized with COVID-19.DesignThis retrospective cohort study assessed the characteristics and mortality rates of adult patients hospitalized with COVID-19 across 21 healthcare systems in the USA from January 1, 2021, to January 31, 2022.ParticipantsAdult patients admitted to participating hospitals who had COVID-19 diagnoses and/or positive PCR tests and completed their hospital stay via discharge or death.Main MeasureIn-hospital mortality vs. discharge (outcome) and patient age, sex, race, ethnicity, BMI, insurance status, comorbidities, and vaccination status extracted from the electronic health record (EHR).Key ResultsOf 86,732 adult patients hospitalized with COVID-19, 45,082 (52%) were female, mean age was 60 years, 20,800 (24%) were Black, and 22,792 (26.3%) had one or more COVID-19 vaccinations. Statistically adjusted mortality rates for unvaccinated and vaccinated patients were 8.3% (95% CI, 8.1–8.5) and 5.1% (95% CI, 4.8–5.4) respectively (7.9% vs. 4.5% with no immune compromise). Vaccination was associated with especially large reductions in mortality for obese (OR = 0.67; 95% CI 0.56–0.80) and severely obese (OR = 0.52; 95% CI, 0.41–0.67) patients and for older patients (OR = 0.99; 95% CI, 0.98–0.99). Mortality likelihood was higher later in the study period (August 2021–January 31, 2022) than earlier (January 1, 2021–July 30, 2021) (OR = 1.10; 95% CI = 1.04–1.17) and increased significantly for vaccinated patients from 4.6% (95% CI, 3.9–5.2%) to 6.5% (95% CI, 6.2–6.9%).ConclusionsPatients vaccinated for COVID-19 had reduced mortality, especially for obese/severely obese and older individuals. Vaccination’s protective effect against mortality declined over time and hospitalized obese and older individuals may derive especially great benefit from prior vaccination against SARS-CoV-2.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11606-022-08007-0.KEY WORDS: COVID, vaccination, COVID mortality risk factors, change in COVID mortality over time

COVID-19 has disrupted virtually every aspect of society, infecting over 85 million individuals in the USA and causing over one million COVID deaths through June 2022.¹ Vaccination with any of the FDA-approved SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) vaccinations can prevent more severe COVID-19 disease,^2–4 protect against different COVID-19 variants,^2–5 and produce persistent effects.² However, important knowledge gaps remain.Little research has examined vaccination effects in hospitalized populations, patients that typically have the most severe COVID disease. While some studies track individuals as they transition from nonhospitalized to hospitalization status,^2,3,6–9 there is less research on vaccination effects in large, hospitalized samples. Research with relatively small samples of hospitalized patients shows that vaccination reduces mortality.^4,10,11 However, the small sample sizes of these studies limit the ability to determine associations between vaccination and disease severity in specific patient groups. Such information could reveal groups who would benefit from additional preventive or ameliorative actions to reduce their risk of COVID-19 morbidity or mortality.This study examined associations between COVID-19 vaccination status and mortality in a sample of 86,732 patients who were hospitalized with COVID-19 from January 2021, when COVID-19 vaccination became generally available, to January 2022.