Corticosteroid use in COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis on clinical outcomes

Aspergillosis: Emerging risk groups in critically ill patients

Information on invasive aspergillosis (IA) and other invasive filamentous fungal infections is limited in non-neutropenic patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) and presenting with no classic IA risk factors. This review is based on the critical appraisal of relevant literature, on the authors' own experience and on discussions that took place at a consensus conference. It aims to review risk factors favoring aspergillosis in ICU patients, with a special emphasis on often overlooked or neglected conditions. In the ICU patients, corticosteroid use to treat underlying conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), sepsis, or severe COVID-19, represents a cardinal risk factor for IA. Important additional host risk factors are COPD, decompensated cirrhosis, liver failure, and severe viral pneumonia (influenza, COVID-19). Clinical observations indicate that patients admitted to the ICU because of sepsis or acute respiratory distress syndrome are more likely to develop probable or proven IA, suggesting that sepsis could also be a possible direct risk factor for IA, as could small molecule inhibitors used in oncology. There are no recommendations for prophylaxis in ICU patients; posaconazole mold-active primary prophylaxis is used in some centers according to guidelines for other patient populations and IA treatment in critically ill patients is basically the same as in other patient populations. A combined evaluation of clinical signs and imaging, classical biomarkers such as the GM assay, and fungal cultures examination, remain the best option to assess response to treatment.

LAY SUMMARY

The use of corticosteroids and the presence of co-morbidities such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, acute or chronic advanced liver disease, or severe viral pneumonia caused by influenza or Covid-19, may increase the risk of invasive aspergillosis in intensive care unit patients.

Homeostatic Regulation of Glucocorticoid Receptor Activity by Hypoxia-Inducible Factor 1: From Physiology to Clinic

Glucocorticoids (GCs) represent a well-known class of lipophilic steroid hormones biosynthesised, with a circadian rhythm, by the adrenal glands in humans and by the inter-renal tissue in teleost fish (e.g., zebrafish). GCs play a key role in the regulation of numerous physiological processes, including inflammation, glucose, lipid, protein metabolism and stress response. This is achieved through binding to their cognate receptor, GR, which functions as a ligand-activated transcription factor. Due to their potent anti-inflammatory and immune-suppressive action, synthetic GCs are broadly used for treating pathological disorders that are very often linked to hypoxia (e.g., rheumatoid arthritis, inflammatory, allergic, infectious, and autoimmune diseases, among others) as well as to prevent graft rejections and against immune system malignancies. However, due to the presence of adverse effects and GC resistance their therapeutic benefits are limited in patients chronically treated with steroids. For this reason, understanding how to fine-tune GR activity is crucial in the search for novel therapeutic strategies aimed at reducing GC-related side effects and effectively restoring homeostasis. Recent research has uncovered novel mechanisms that inhibit GR function, thereby causing glucocorticoid resistance, and has produced some surprising new findings. In this review we analyse these mechanisms and focus on the crosstalk between GR and HIF signalling. Indeed, its comprehension may provide new routes to develop novel therapeutic targets for effectively treating immune and inflammatory response and to simultaneously facilitate the development of innovative GCs with a better benefits-risk ratio.

Expert Consensus Statements on the Use of Corticosteroids in Non-severe COVID-19

Introduction

There is strong evidence for the use of corticosteroid in the management of severe coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). However, there is still uncertainty about the timing of corticosteroids. We undertook a modified Delphi study to develop expert consensus statements on the early identification of a subset of patients from non-severe COVID-19 who may benefit from using corticosteroids.

Methods

A modified Delphi was conducted with two anonymous surveys between April 30, 2021, and May 3, 2021. An expert panel of 35 experts was selected and invited to participate through e-mail. The consensus was defined as >70% votes in multiple-choice questions (MCQ) on Likert-scale type statements, while strong consensus as >90% votes in MCQ or >50% votes for "very important" on Likert-scale questions in the final round.

Results

Twenty experts completed two rounds of the survey. There was strong consensus for the increased work of breathing (95%), a positive six-minute walk test (90%), thorax computed tomography severity score of >14/25 (85%), new-onset organ dysfunction (using clinical or biochemical criteria) (80%), and C-reactive protein >5 times the upper limit of normal (70%) as the criteria for patients' selection. The experts recommended using oral or intravenous (IV) low-dose corticosteroids (the equivalent of 6 mg/day dexamethasone) for 5-10 days and monitoring of oxygen saturation, body temperature, clinical scoring system, blood sugar, and inflammatory markers for any "red-flag" signs.

Conclusion

The experts recommended against indiscriminate use of corticosteroids in mild to moderate COVID-19 without the signs of clinical worsening. Oral or IV low-dose corticosteroids (the equivalent of 6 mg/day dexamethasone) for 5-10 days are recommended for patients with features of disease progression based on clinical, biochemical, or radiological criteria after 5 days from symptom onset under close monitoring.

How to cite this article

How to cite this article: Nasa P, Chaudhry D, Govil D, Daga MK, Jain R, Chhallani AA, et al. Expert Consensus Statements on the Use of Corticosteroids in Non-severe COVID-19. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021;25(11):1280-1285.

Acute respiratory distress syndrome in COVID-19: possible mechanisms and therapeutic management

COVID-19 pandemic is a serious concern in the new era. Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and lung failure are the main lung diseases in COVID-19 patients. Even though COVID-19 vaccinations are available now, there is still an urgent need to find potential treatments to ease the effects of COVID-19 on already sick patients. Multiple experimental drugs have been approved by the FDA with unknown efficacy and possible adverse effects. Probably the increasing number of studies worldwide examining the potential COVID-19 related therapies will help to identification of effective ARDS treatment. In this review article, we first provide a summary on immunopathology of ARDS next we will give an overview of management of patients with COVID-19 requiring intensive care unit (ICU), while focusing on the current treatment strategies being evaluated in the clinical trials in COVID-19-induced ARDS patients.

Role of myeloid-derived suppressor cells in viral respiratory infections; Hints for discovering therapeutic targets for COVID-19

The expansion of myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs), known as heterogeneous population of immature myeloid cells, is enhanced during several pathological conditions such as inflammatory or viral respiratory infections. It seems that the way MDSCs behave in infection depends on the type and the virulence mechanisms of the invader pathogen, the disease stage, and the infection-related pathology. Increasing evidence showing that in correlation with the severity of the disease, MDSCs are accumulated in COVID-19 patients, in particular in those at severe stages of the disease or ICU patients, contributing to pathogenesis of SARS-CoV2 infection. Based on the involved subsets, MDSCs delay the clearance of the virus through inhibiting T-cell proliferation and responses by employing various mechanisms such as inducing the secretion of anti-inflammatory cytokines, inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS)-mediated hampering of IFN-γ production, or forcing arginine shortage. While the immunosuppressive characteristic of MDSCs may help to preserve the tissue homeostasis and prevent hyperinflammation at early stages of the infection, hampering of efficient immune responses proved to exert significant pathogenic effects on severe forms of COVID-19, suggesting the targeting of MDSCs as a potential intervention to reactivate T-cell immunity and thereby prevent the infection from developing into severe stages of the disease. This review tried to compile evidence on the roles of different subsets of MDSCs during viral respiratory infections, which is far from being totally understood, and introduce the promising potential of MDSCs for developing novel diagnostic and therapeutic approaches, especially against COVID-19 disease.

Feminising hormone therapy reduces testicular ACE-2 receptor expression: Implications for treatment or prevention of COVID-19 infection in men

It has been proposed that men hospitalised with COVID-19 be treated with oestrogen or progesterone to improve COVID-19 outcomes. Transgender women (male-to-female) are routinely treated with oestrogen or oestrogen +progesterone for feminisation which provides a model for the effect of feminising hormones on testicular tissue. Our goal was to analyse differences in ACE-2 expression in testicles of trans-women taking oestrogen or oestrogen +progesterone. Orchiectomy specimens were collected from trans-women undergoing gender-affirming surgery, who were taking oestrogen or oestrogen+progesterone preoperatively. For controls, we used benign orchiectomy specimens from cis-gender men. All specimens were stained with H&E, Trichrome (fibrosis), insulin-like 3 antibody (Leydig cell) and ACE-2 IHC. Cells per high-powered field were counted by cell type (Leydig, Sertoli and Germ). Stain intensity was rated on a 0-2 scale. On immunohistochemistry staining for Leydig cells and ACE-2 staining, the oestrogen+progesterone cohort had fewer Leydig cells compared with controls. The oestrogen+progesterone cohort also had greater degree of tissue fibrosis compared with controls and the oestrogen cohort. This work supports the hopeful possibility that a short course of progesterone (or oestrogen+progesterone) could downregulate ACE-2 to protect men from COVID-19 infection.

[Caution with the use of dexamethasone in patients with COVID-19 in its initial phases]

INTRODUCTION

The effect of dexamethasone in the initial phase of infection by SARS-CoV-2 and its influence on COVID-19 is not well defined. We describe clinical-radiological characteristics, the cytokine storm parameters, and the clinical evolution of a series of patients treated with dexamethasone in the disease's initial phase.

METHOD

A study of 8 patients who received dexamethasone before the development of COVID-19. We evaluate clinical variables, imaging tests, cytokine release parameters, treatment used and patient evolution.

RESULTS

All patients received a 6 mg/day dose with a mean duration of 4.5 days before admission. High resolution computed tomography (HRCT) revealed that most of them presented a severe extension; most patients had a slightly elevated level of cytokine release parameters. Three patients required high-flow oxygen therapy due to respiratory failure; none required orotracheal intubation or died.

CONCLUSION

Dexamethasone in the early stages of SARS-CoV-2 infection appears to be associated with severe COVID-19.

Tocilizumab in critically ill COVID-19 patients: An observational study

Tocilizumab decreases inflammatory response in the cytokine storm which is one of the mechanisms behind the development of ARDS in COVID-19 patients. The objective of our study was to determine response of tocilizumab in patients suffering from COVID-19 by analyzing clinical parameters and inflammatory markers. A single-arm observational retrospective study was conducted from March 15, 2020 to March 15, 2021. Clinical outcomes in terms of mortality, weaning from mechanical ventilator, improvement in laboratory parameters including inflammatory cytokines, and length of hospital stay were documented. Reduction in values of inflammatory markers, and patients discharged home in stable condition were defined as an improvement after tocilizumab administration. A total of 514 patients received tocilizumab, majority of whom were critically sick 333 (64.8%). Out of the total sample 363 (70.6%) patients were discharged home in stable condition. Overall mean length of stay was 11.50 ± 8.4 days. There was significant difference in length of stay of patients who required invasive mechanical ventilation as compared to those who were kept only on supplemental oxygen (p < 0.05). Patients who were discharged home showed significant improvement in inflammatory markers and neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio as compared to those who expired (p < 0.05). A total of 21 (4.1%) patients had positive blood culture while 57 (11.1%) had positive culture of tracheal aspirate. Hence, tocilizumab is found to be a reasonable therapeutic option for worsening COVID-19 pneumonia by decreasing the need for mechanical ventilation. However, it is associated with adverse events including bacterial and fungal infections.

Corticosteroid treatment and mortality in mechanically ventilated COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients: a multicentre cohort study

BACKGROUND

Some unanswered questions persist regarding the effectiveness of corticosteroids for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. We aimed to assess the clinical effect of corticosteroids on intensive care unit (ICU) mortality among mechanically ventilated COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of prospectively collected data conducted in 70 ICUs (68 Spanish, one Andorran, one Irish), including mechanically ventilated COVID-19-associated ARDS patients admitted between February 6 and September 20, 2020. Individuals who received corticosteroids for refractory shock were excluded. Patients exposed to corticosteroids at admission were matched with patients without corticosteroids through propensity score matching. Primary outcome was all-cause ICU mortality. Secondary outcomes were to compare in-hospital mortality, ventilator-free days at 28 days, respiratory superinfection and length of stay between patients with corticosteroids and those without corticosteroids. We performed survival analysis accounting for competing risks and subgroup sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

We included 1835 mechanically ventilated COVID-19-associated ARDS, of whom 1117 (60.9%) received corticosteroids. After propensity score matching, ICU mortality did not differ between patients treated with corticosteroids and untreated patients (33.8% vs. 30.9%; p = 0.28). In survival analysis, corticosteroid treatment at ICU admission was associated with short-term survival benefit (HR 0.53; 95% CI 0.39-0.72), although beyond the 17th day of admission, this effect switched and there was an increased ICU mortality (long-term HR 1.68; 95% CI 1.16-2.45). The sensitivity analysis reinforced the results. Subgroups of age < 60 years, severe ARDS and corticosteroids plus tocilizumab could have greatest benefit from corticosteroids as short-term decreased ICU mortality without long-term negative effects were observed. Larger length of stay was observed with corticosteroids among non-survivors both in the ICU and in hospital. There were no significant differences for the remaining secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that corticosteroid treatment for mechanically ventilated COVID-19-associated ARDS had a biphasic time-dependent effect on ICU mortality. Specific subgroups showed clear effect on improving survival with corticosteroid use. Therefore, further research is required to identify treatment-responsive subgroups among the mechanically ventilated COVID-19-associated ARDS patients.

Mortality due to COVID-19 infection: A comparison of first and second waves

Background

The USA suffered an initial wave of COVID-19 cases from March to July in 2020. Cases again surged in August 2020 as business restrictions were lifted. We aimed to describe demographic, treatment, and mortality differences between both waves.

Methods

We identified all hospitalized patients with COVID-19 infection in one US six-hospital health system between 1 March 2020 and 31 January 2021. We compared data obtained on patient demographics, treatment received, and mortality between first and second waves of the pandemic.

Results

A total of 4434 hospitalized COVID patients were identified, including 1313 patients in the first wave and 3121 patients in the second wave. Mortality was significantly higher in the first wave as compared to the second wave (23.2% vs. 12.3%, p < 0.001). Age and sex were similar in each wave. In the first wave, there were significantly more Non-Hispanic Black patients (28.8 vs. 18.1%, p < 0.001) and Hispanic patients (26.6% vs. 14.9%, p < 0.001) as compared to the second wave. There was a higher mortality rate in the first wave as compared to the second, which persisted after multivariable adjustment for sex, age, ethnicity, laboratory results at admission, treatment received, high flow use and mechanical ventilation (OR: 2.66, 95% CI: 1.83–3.87, p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Mortality in the second wave was lower than the first wave with significantly higher utilization of steroids, remdesivir and convalescent plasma in second wave.

Fragility Index and Fragility Quotient in Randomized Controlled Trials on Corticosteroids in ARDS Due to COVID-19 and Non-COVID-19 Etiology

Background: The effectiveness of corticosteroids in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and COVID-19 still remains uncertain. Since ARDS is due to a hyperinflammatory response to a direct injury, we decided to perform a meta-analysis and an evaluation of robustness of randomised clinical trials (RCTs) investigating the impact of corticosteroids on mortality in ARDS in both COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients. We conducted a systematic search of the literature from inception up to 30 October 2020, using the MEDLINE database and the PubMed interface. We evaluated the fragility index (FI) of the included RCTs using a two-by-two contingency table and the p-value produced by the Fisher exact test; the fragility quotient (FQ) was calculated by dividing the FI score by the total sample size of the trial. Results: Thirteen RCTs were included in the analysis; five of them were conducted in COVID-19 ARDS, including 7692 patients, while 8 RCTS were performed in non-COVID ARDS with 1091 patients evaluated. Three out of eight RCTs in ARDS had a FI > 0 while 2 RCTs out of five in COVID-19 had FI > 0. The median of FI for ARDS was 0.625 (0.47) while the median of FQ was 0.03 (0.014). The median of FI for COVID-19 was 6 (2) while the median of FQ was 0.059 (0.055). In this systematic review, we found that FI and FQ of RCTs evaluating the use of corticosteroids in ARDS and COVID-19 were low.

Headache as a Symptom of COVID-19: Narrative Review of 1-Year Research

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Headache is a common symptom of COVID-19 with emerging literature being published on the subject. Although it may seem unspecific, scientific evidence has allowed a better definition of this headache type, revealing relevant associations with other COVID-19 symptoms and prognoses. We therefore sought to highlight the most remarkable findings concerning headache secondary to COVID-19, specifically focusing on epidemiology, characteristics, pathophysiology, and treatments.

RECENT FINDINGS

The real prevalence of headache as a symptom of COVID-19 is still unclear ranging from 10 to 70%. Headache mainly has a tension-type-like phenotype, although 25% of individuals present with migraine-like features that also occur in patients without personal migraine history. This finding suggests that a likely pathophysiological mechanism is the activation of the trigeminovascular system. SARS-CoV-2 neurotropism can occur by trans-synaptic invasion through the olfactory route from the nasal cavity, leading to anosmia which has been associated with headache. SARS-CoV-2 protein has been found not only in olfactory mucosa and bulbs but also in trigeminal branches and the trigeminal ganglion, supporting this hypothesis. However, other mechanisms such as brain vessels inflammation due to SARS-CoV-2 damage to the endothelium or systemic inflammation in the context of cytokine storm cannot be ruled out. Interestingly, headache has been associated with lower COVID-19 mortality. No specific treatment for COVID-19 headache is available at present. Studies show that investigating COVID-19 headache represents an opportunity not only to better understand COVID-19 in general but also to advance in the knowledge of both secondary and primary headaches. Future research is therefore warranted.

Management of infectious complications associated with coronavirus infection in severe patients admitted to ICU

Infections have become one of the main complications of patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia admitted in ICU. Poor immune status, frequent development of organic failure requiring invasive supportive treatments, and prolonged ICU length of stay in saturated structural areas of patients are risk factors for infection development. The Working Group on Infectious Diseases and Sepsis GTEIS of the Spanish Society of Intensive Medicine and Coronary Units SEMICYUC emphasizes the importance of infection prevention measures related to health care, the detection and early treatment of major infections in the patient with SARS-CoV-2 infections. Bacterial co-infection, respiratory infections related to mechanical ventilation, catheter-related bacteremia, device-associated urinary tract infection and opportunistic infections are review in the document.

Effectiveness of corticosteroids to treat severe COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of corticosteroid therapy for patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

METHODS

We comprehensively searched articles published in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, China Biology Medicine (CBM), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang, and VIP databases from January 1, 2019, to March 20, 2021.

RESULTS

A total of 6771 patients from eight prospective studies were included in our meta-analysis. The results showed that corticosteroid therapy was associated with lower mortality in severe COVID-19 (OR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.54-0.92, P = 0.009; I² = 54.5%). Since the proportion of the RECOVERY (Randomized Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy) trial included in the meta-analysis was as high as 71.88%, we removed it and recalculated the pooled OR. The results of the remaining seven studies still suggested such a survival benefit (OR = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.44-0.96, P = 0.030; I² = 59.8%). Furthermore, subgroup analysis suggested that the pooled OR of three studies using corticosteroids in the early stages of treatment was much lower (OR = 0.37, 95% CI = 0.25-0.57, P < 0.001; I² = 47.8%). However, after excluding the RECOVERY trial, the pooled OR of the remaining four studies with unspecific administration timing of corticosteroid therapy no longer supported this result (OR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.69-1.17, P = 0.415; I² = 0.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

In this meta-analysis, evidence based on seven randomized controlled trials and one prospective cohort study indicates that corticosteroid therapy was associated with a reduction in the mortality of severe COVID-19, especially when administered at an earlier time.

Expert Consensus Statements on the Use of Corticosteroids in Non-severe COVID-19

INTRODUCTION

There is strong evidence for the use of corticosteroid in the management of severe coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). However, there is still uncertainty about the timing of corticosteroids. We undertook a modified Delphi study to develop expert consensus statements on the early identification of a subset of patients from non-severe COVID-19 who may benefit from using corticosteroids.

METHODS

A modified Delphi was conducted with two anonymous surveys between April 30, 2021, and May 3, 2021. An expert panel of 35 experts was selected and invited to participate through e-mail. The consensus was defined as >70% votes in multiple-choice questions (MCQ) on Likert-scale type statements, while strong consensus as >90% votes in MCQ or >50% votes for "very important" on Likert-scale questions in the final round.

RESULTS

Twenty experts completed two rounds of the survey. There was strong consensus for the increased work of breathing (95%), a positive six-minute walk test (90%), thorax computed tomography severity score of >14/25 (85%), new-onset organ dysfunction (using clinical or biochemical criteria) (80%), and C-reactive protein >5 times the upper limit of normal (70%) as the criteria for patients' selection. The experts recommended using oral or intravenous (IV) low-dose corticosteroids (the equivalent of 6 mg/day dexamethasone) for 5-10 days and monitoring of oxygen saturation, body temperature, clinical scoring system, blood sugar, and inflammatory markers for any "red-flag" signs.

CONCLUSION

The experts recommended against indiscriminate use of corticosteroids in mild to moderate COVID-19 without the signs of clinical worsening. Oral or IV low-dose corticosteroids (the equivalent of 6 mg/day dexamethasone) for 5-10 days are recommended for patients with features of disease progression based on clinical, biochemical, or radiological criteria after 5 days from symptom onset under close monitoring.

HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE

How to cite this article: Nasa P, Chaudhry D, Govil D, Daga MK, Jain R, Chhallani AA, et al. Expert Consensus Statements on the Use of Corticosteroids in Non-severe COVID-19. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021;25(11):1280-1285.

Myocarditis associated with Covid-19 disease: A systematic review of published case reports and case series

BACKGROUND

Covid-19 is an extremely contagious illness caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS-CoV-2) virus. The cardiac involvement in such a public health emergency disease has not been well studied and a conflicting evidence exists on this issue.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review article aimed to compile and illustrate clinical characteristics, diagnostic findings, management, and outcomes manifesting in myocarditis linked with Covid-19.

METHODS

A literature search was accomplished for published eligible articles with MEDLINE/PubMed and Embase databases. All eligible case reports and case series were included from around the world without any language restrictions. For this review, inclusion criteria were laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection cases reporting a diagnosis of acute myocarditis.

RESULTS

Data from 41 studies describing myocarditis in 42 Covid-19 patients was obtained. The median age of these patients was 43.4 years, with 71.4% of them being men. Fever was the most prevalent presenting symptoms seen in 57% of patients. Hypertension was the most pervasive comorbidity accompanying these patients. Cardiac biomarkers troponin and brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) were raised in almost 90% and 87% of patients, respectively. Electrocardiogram findings were nonspecific and included ST-segment and T-wave changes. Echocardiogram commonly showed left ventricular systolic dysfunction with increased heart size. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMRI) exhibited myocardial edema and injury. The most prevalent histopathological feature appreciated was diffuse lymphocytic inflammatory infiltrates. Antivirals and corticosteroids were the most frequently used medications. About 38% of patients also needed vasopressor assistance. Out of 42 patients, 67% recovered, and eight died.

CONCLUSION

Because of the risk of a sudden worsening of patients conditions and myocarditis association with considerable mortality and morbidity, a knowledge of this cardiac complication of Covid-19 disease is crucial for healthcare professionals.

[Management of infectious complications associated with coronavirus infection in severe patients admitted to ICU]

Infections have become one of the main complications of patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia admitted in ICU. Poor immune status, frequent development of organic failure requiring invasive supportive treatments, and prolonged ICU length of stay in saturated structural areas of patients are risk factors for infection development. The Working Group on Infectious Diseases and Sepsis GTEIS of the Spanish Society of Intensive Medicine and Coronary Units SEMICYUC emphasizes the importance of infection prevention measures related to health care, the detection and early treatment of major infections in the patient with SARS-CoV-2 infections. Bacterial co-infection, respiratory infections related to mechanical ventilation, catheter-related bacteremia, device-associated urinary tract infection and opportunistic infections are review in the document.

COVID-19-Associated Pulmonary Aspergillosis, Fungemia, and Pneumocystosis in the Intensive Care Unit: a Retrospective Multicenter Observational Cohort during the First French Pandemic Wave

The aim of this study was to evaluate diagnostic means, host factors, delay of occurrence, and outcome of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and fungal coinfections in the intensive care unit (ICU). From 1 February to 31 May 2020, we anonymously recorded COVID-19-associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA), fungemia (CA-fungemia), and pneumocystosis (CA-PCP) from 36 centers, including results on fungal biomarkers in respiratory specimens and serum. We collected data from 154 episodes of CAPA, 81 of CA-fungemia, 17 of CA-PCP, and 5 of other mold infections from 244 patients (male/female [M/F] ratio = 3.5; mean age, 64.7 ± 10.8 years). CA-PCP occurred first after ICU admission (median, 1 day; interquartile range [IQR], 0 to 3 days), followed by CAPA (9 days; IQR, 5 to 13 days), and then CA-fungemia (16 days; IQR, 12 to 23 days) (P < 10-4). For CAPA, the presence of several mycological criteria was associated with death (P < 10-4). Serum galactomannan was rarely positive (<20%). The mortality rates were 76.7% (23/30) in patients with host factors for invasive fungal disease, 45.2% (14/31) in those with a preexisting pulmonary condition, and 36.6% (34/93) in the remaining patients (P = 0.001). Antimold treatment did not alter prognosis (P = 0.370). Candida albicans was responsible for 59.3% of CA-fungemias, with a global mortality of 45.7%. For CA-PCP, 58.8% of the episodes occurred in patients with known host factors of PCP, and the mortality rate was 29.5%. CAPA may be in part hospital acquired and could benefit from antifungal prescription at the first positive biomarker result. CA-fungemia appeared linked to ICU stay without COVID-19 specificity, while CA-PCP may not really be a concern in the ICU. Improved diagnostic strategy for fungal markers in ICU patients with COVID-19 should support these hypotheses. IMPORTANCE To diagnose fungal coinfections in patients with COVID-19 in the intensive care unit, it is necessary to implement the correct treatment and to prevent them if possible. For COVID-19-associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA), respiratory specimens remain the best approach since serum biomarkers are rarely positive. Timing of occurrence suggests that CAPA could be hospital acquired. The associated mortality varies from 36.6% to 76.7% when no host factors or host factors of invasive fungal diseases are present, respectively. Fungemias occurred after 2 weeks in ICUs and are associated with a mortality rate of 45.7%. Candida albicans is the first yeast species recovered, with no specificity linked to COVID-19. Pneumocystosis was mainly found in patients with known immunodepression. The diagnosis occurred at the entry in ICUs and not afterwards, suggesting that if Pneumocystis jirovecii plays a role, it is upstream of the hospitalization in the ICU.

Organising pneumonia manifesting as a late-phase complication of COVID-19

Acute COVID-19 usually lasts 4 weeks from the onset of symptoms. We report two cases of COVID-19-associated organising pneumonia (OP) occurring beyond 4 weeks from the acute onset of symptoms. Both tested positive for SARS reverse transcription-PCR 2 months before presentation with a resolution of respiratory symptoms. The first case presented with residual fatigue and worsening exertional dyspnoea. Chest CT revealed an OP pattern. The second case presented with worsening cough and new-onset pleuritic chest pain with persistent radiological consolidation. A transbronchial lung biopsy confirmed OP. Both patients responded well to 12 weeks of steroid therapy. This case illustrates the rare presentation of OP as a late sequela of COVID-19 and the good response to steroid therapy.

Telemedicine monitoring of high-risk coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients by family medicine service after discharge from the emergency department

BACKGROUND:

Up to 25% of the total coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) admissions comprise patients with comorbidities who present to the emergency department (ED) with only mild-to-moderate disease. It is unclear whether as an alternative to hospitalization, telemedicine can be used to monitor these “high-risk” comorbid patients. The aim of our study was to answer this question by comparing the outcome of such patients discharged under a family medicine service (FMS) telemonitoring program and those admitted to hospital.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

Patients with three or more risk factors for progression to severe COVID-19 disease were designated as “high-risk” in our study. In the absence of acute indication for hospitalization, these high-risk patients with mild-to-moderate disease were discharged home under the supervision of FMS led telemonitoring between October 2020 and February 2021 and were labelled as “Telemedicine group.” They were compared to similar patients who were admitted to hospital between March-August 2020 before the implementation of telemedicine service (TMS) and were taken as “Control group.” Outcome measures included intubation, number of inpatient days, 28-day mortality and cost analysis for the two groups.

RESULTS:

Out of 572 COVID-19 patients who presented to the ED, 70 met the inclusion criteria for the “Telemedicine Group” and 35 were included in the “Control Group”. In the Telemedicine group, 21 (30.0%) patients were brought back to ED for re-evaluation and 16 (22.9%) were eventually admitted to the hospital. There was no difference in terms of oxygen requirements, intubation, and intensive care unit admission (P > 0.74) between the groups, and none of the study patients died. The Family Medicine-led TMS saved 77% inpatient admissions and on average 4.4 hospital days and $3400 per patient (P < . 0001).

CONCLUSION:

Family medicine-led telemonitoring of high-risk COVID-19 patients presenting to the ED with mild-to-moderate disease is a feasible and cost-effective alternative to hospitalization.

Coronavirus disease 2019 in liver transplant patients: Clinical and therapeutic aspects

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has profoundly impacted liver transplant (LT) activity across the world, with notable decreases in the number of donations and procedures in most Western countries, in particular throughout the first wave. The cumulative incidence of COVID-19 in LT recipients (with estimates ranging from 0.34% to 1.56%) appears to be at least comparable to that observed for the general population. Clinical and radiological features at presentation are also similar to non-transplant patients. The risk of death among LT recipients requiring hospital admission is high (from 12% to 19%), although some authors have suggested that overall mortality may be actually lower compared to the general non-transplant population. It is likely that these poor outcomes may be mainly influenced by the older age and higher comorbidity burden of LT recipients, rather than by the transplant status itself. In fact, it has been hypothesized that post-transplant immunosuppression would exert a protective role, with special focus on tacrolimus-containing regimens. There is scarce evidence to guide the optimal management of post-transplant COVID-19 and the use of antiviral or immunomodulatory therapies, although both clinical practice and guidelines support the dose reduction or withdrawal of anti-proliferative agents such as mofetil mycophenolate. Preliminary reports suggest that the antibody response to messenger RNA vaccines is significantly impaired as compared to non-immunocompromised individuals, in line with other transplant populations. Finally, it is foreseeable that the future will be conditioned by the emerging variants of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 with increased transmissibility among LT recipients.

COVID-19 Infection, Admission and Death Amongst People with Rare Autoimmune Rheumatic Disease in England. Results from the RECORDER Project

Objectives

To calculate the rates of COVID-19 infection and COVID-19-related death among people with rare autoimmune rheumatic diseases (RAIRD) during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in England compared with the general population.

Methods

We used Hospital Episode Statistics to identify all people alive 01 March 2020 with ICD-10 codes for RAIRD from the whole population of England. We used linked national health records (demographic, death certificate, admissions and PCR testing data) to calculate rates of COVID-19 infection and death up to 31 July 2020. Our primary definition of COVID-19-related death was mention of COVID-19 on the death certificate. General population data from Public Health England and the Office for National Statistics were used for comparison. We also describe COVID-19-related hospital admissions and all-cause deaths.

Results

We identified a cohort of 168 680 people with RAIRD, of whom 1874 (1.11%) had a positive COVID-19 PCR test. The age-standardised infection rate was 1.54 (95% CI 1.50–1.59) times higher than in the general population. 713 (0.42%) people with RAIRD died with COVID-19 on their death certificate and the age-sex-standardised mortality rate for COVID-19-related death was 2.41 (2.30–2.53) times higher than in the general population. There was no evidence of an increase in deaths from other causes in the RAIRD population.

Conclusions

During the first wave of COVID-19 in England, people with RAIRD had a 54% increased risk of COVID-19 infection and more than twice the risk of COVID-19-related death compared with the general population. These increases were seen despite shielding policies.

A review of the presentation and outcome of sarcoidosis in coronavirus disease 2019

BACKGROUND

In the setting of the current pandemic, concerns have arisen regarding the multisystemic involvement of sarcoidosis and the possible exacerbations in response to the exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2.

AIM

This study aims to compare the differences in clinical presentation, management, and outcome of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) between patients with sarcoidosis and those in the general population.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted by reviewing original research articles such as case reports, case series, observational studies, and questionnaire-based surveys published in PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, and Google scholar. Data from individual patients in case series and case reports have been pooled to create a data set that was compared with larger such cohorts obtained from several other observational studies.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven patients were identified from 14 original articles. No significant differences were found in the clinical manifestations of patients with sarcoidosis presenting with COVID-19 as compared to the general population. The rate of hospitalization in our study was found to be 48.1%. The overall mortality in our study was 7.4%, which is higher than the global average of 2.1%.

CONCLUSION

Our observations have reinforced the hypothesis that the presence of additional medical comorbidities is associated with a higher risk of intensive care unit admission. Furthermore, the presence of moderate to a severe limitation in pulmonary functions is an additional risk factor associated with increased hospital admissions and mortality in sarcoidosis. However, neither the diagnosis of sarcoidosis nor ongoing treatment with steroids, methotrexate, or other immunosuppressants was associated with a poorer prognosis in patients with sarcoidosis.

RELEVANCE FOR PATIENTS

Patients with sarcoidosis must take added precautions to mitigate the risk of acquiring COVID-19 infection in view of the COVID-19-related mortality rate in this group of patients. Specifically, immunocompromised patients (on immunomodulator drugs and high dose steroids) have been found to have an increased risk of contracting COVID-19. Overall impact on prognostication and outcome in cases requiring hospitalization remains yet to be determined.

Clinical characteristics and risk factors for 28-day mortality in critically ill patients with COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study

Background

To date, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused more than 2.6 million deaths all around the world. Risk factors for mortality remain unclear. The primary aim was to determine the independent risk factors for 28-day mortality.

Materials and methods

In this retrospective cohort study, critically ill patients (≥ 18 years) who were admitted to the intensive care unit due to COVID-19 were included. Patient characteristics, laboratory data, radiologic findings, treatments, and complications were analyzed in the study.

Results

A total of 249 patients (median age 71, 69.1% male) were included in the study. 28-day mortality was 67.9% (n = 169). The median age of deceased patients was 75 (66–81). Of them, 68.6% were male. Cerebrovascular disease, dementia, chronic kidney disease, and malignancy were significantly higher in the deceased group. In the multivariate analysis, sepsis/septic shock (OR, 15.16, 95% CI, 3.96–58.11, p < 0.001), acute kidney injury (OR, 4.73, 95% CI, 1.55–14.46, p = 0.006), acute cardiac injury (OR, 9.76, 95% CI, 1.84–51.83, p = 0.007), and chest CT score higher than 15 (OR, 4.49, 95% CI, 1.51-13.38, p = 0.007) were independent risk factors for 28-day mortality.

Conclusion

Early detection of the risk factors and the use of chest CT score might improve the outcomes in patients with COVID-19.

The role of ventilatory support for long-term outcomes after critical infection with COVID-19: A prospective cohort study

Objectives

The full range of long‐term health consequences in intensive care unit (ICU) survivors with COVID‐19 is unclear. This study aims to investigate the role of ventilatory support for long‐term pulmonary impairment in critically ill patients and further to identify risk factors for prolonged radiological recovery.

Methods

A prospective observational study from a single general hospital, including all with COVID‐19 admitted to ICU between March and August 2020, investigating the association between ventilatory support and the extent of residual parenchymal changes on chest computed tomography (CT) scan and measurement of lung volumes at follow‐up comparing high‐flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) or non‐invasive ventilation (NIV) with invasive ventilation. A semi‐quantitative score (CT involvement score) based on lobar involvement and a total score for all five lobes was used to estimate residual parenchymal changes. The association was calculated with logistic regression and adjusted for age, sex, smoking, and severity of illness.

Results

Among the 187 eligible, 86 had a chest CT scan and 76 a pulmonary function test at the follow‐up with a median time of 6 months after ICU discharge. Residual lung changes were seen in 74%. The extent of pulmonary changes was similar regardless of ventilatory support, but patients with invasive ventilation had a lower total lung capacity 84% versus 92% of predicted (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

The majority of ICU‐treated patients with COVID‐19 had residual lung changes at 6 months of follow‐up regardless of ventilator support or not, but the total lung capacity was lower in those treated with invasive ventilation.

Use of steroids in COVID-19 patients: A meta-analysis

Background

Emerging reports have shown the benefits of steroids in hospitalized COVID-19 patients as life-saving drugs. However, the use of steroids in COVID-19 patients is confusing among many physicians.

Aim

The aim of the current study was to find out the exact association of steroids in the deaths of COVID-19 patients.

Methods

The relevant studies were searched in PubMed, Google scholar, and Clinical trials registries till May 25, 2021 and sorted out based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. The quality of studies was assessed using a standard scale. The pooled odds ratio was calculated with a 95% confidence interval. The sensitivity and sub-group analyses were also done. The publication bias was assessed qualitatively. The Rev Man 5 was used for all analyses with a random-effect model.

Results

The quantitative analysis was done with 9922 patients (6265-male and 3657-females) from 21 relevant studies. The pooled estimate results i.e. 0.52 [0.34, 0.80] have shown a significant reduction in deaths of COVID-19 patients in the steroidal group as compared to the non-steroidal group. The sensitivity analyses did not alter our conclusions. In subgroup analysis, methylprednisolone has shown a significant reduction in deaths of COVID-19 patients as compared to the non-steroidal group, however, more clinical evidence is required for dexamethasone and hydrocortisone.

Conclusion

The use of steroids in hospitalized COVID-19 patients is useful to reduce deaths.

Corticosteroids for COVID-19: worth it or not?

Pathogenesis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) induced COVID-19 implied the presence of excessive proinflammatory cytokines and chemokines in patients causing significant morbidity and mortality. To diminish systemic hyper inflammation, a few physicians and researchers have utilized corticosteroids. Corticosteroid implementation has increased after the publication of interim guidelines regarding corticosteroid use in COVID-19 patients by WHO, despite the remaining controversies regarding long-term side effects and disease progression capability of corticosteroids. In different studies, the implementation of corticosteroids on COVID-19 patients revealed controversial results, which require further intensive research. This review will present the current outcomes and possibilities of using corticosteroids to treat COVID-19 patients.

Dexamethasone in Treatment of Comorbid SARS-CoV-2 Patients Aged over 50 Years with Lung Injury over 50 %

Aim. An efficacy assessment of steroid therapy in SARS-CoV-2 patients aged over 50 years with lung damage over 50 % (grade 3–4).

Materials and methods. A retrospective study of 158 SARS-CoV-2 patients hospitalised in April—June 2020 was conducted under the inclusion criteria: age over 50 years, chest computed tomography (CT) for COVID-19-asso-ciated pneumonia, C-reactive protein (CRP) >50 mg/L, anticoagulant therapy, no contraindications to steroids, no biologic therapy. Cohort 1 patients (n = 96) received dexamethasone 4–12 mg/day, cohort 2 (n = 62) — a standard non-dexamethasone therapy.

Results. Dexamethasone treatment associated with a significant alleviation of COVID-19-associated pneumonia in CT score (p = 0.001), reduced fibrinogen (p = 0.001), a trend to CRP reduction by day 8–10 and lower demand for oxygen therapy, including ventilatory support (p = 0.001). Mortality rate was 19.8 and 75.8 % in cohorts 1 and 2, respectively (p = 0.001).

Conclusion. Dexamethasone therapy 4–12 mg/day in SARS-CoV-2 patients aged 50+ years with grade 3–4 CT changes receiving LMWH from start of hospitalisation significantly improved CT scores and reduced mortality.

The effect of glucocorticoids on mortality in severe COVID-19 patients: Evidence from 13 studies involving 6612 cases

BACKGROUND

Since the start of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, there is an urgent need for effective therapies for patients with COVID-19. In this study, we aimed to assess the therapeutic efficacy of glucocorticoids in severe COVID-19.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed across PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library (up to June 26, 2021). The literature investigated the outcomes of interest were mortality and invasive mechanical ventilation.

RESULTS

The search identified 13 studies with 6612 confirmed severe COVID-19 patients. Our meta-analysis found that using glucocorticoids could significantly decrease COVID-19 mortality (hazard ratio (HR) 0.60, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45-0.79, P < .001), relative to non-use of glucocorticoids. Meanwhile, using glucocorticoids also could significantly decrease the risk of progression to invasive mechanical ventilation for severe COVID-19 patients (HR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.58-0.83, P < .001). Compared with using dexamethasone (HR = 0.68, 95% CI 0.50-0.92, P = .012), methylprednisolone use had a better therapeutic effect for reducing the mortality of patients (HR = 0.35, 95% CI 0.19-0.64, P = .001).

CONCLUSION

The result of this meta-analysis showed that using glucocorticoids could reduce mortality and risk of progression to invasive mechanical ventilation in severe COVID-19 patients.

Effects of COVID-19 on the Musculoskeletal System: Clinician's Guide

The global pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2, or COVID-19, continues to impact all facets of daily life. Clinical manifestations of COVID-19 commonly include musculoskeletal symptoms such as myalgias, arthralgias, and neuropathies/myopathies. The inflammatory response and its impact on the respiratory system have been the focus of most studies. However, the literature is more limited regarding the inflammatory response and its implications for other organ systems, specifically the musculoskeletal system. Previous studies have described how systemic inflammation may play a role in bone and joint pathology. Furthermore, it is important to understand the effects current therapeutics used in the treatment of COVID-19 may have on the musculoskeletal system. In this study, we will review the current understanding of the effect COVID-19 has on the musculoskeletal system, provide an overview of musculoskeletal symptoms of patients infected with the virus, and address key issues for clinicians to address during the care of COVID-19 patients.

Caution with the use of dexamethasone in patients with COVID-19 in its initial phases

Introduction

The effect of dexamethasone in the initial phase of infection by SARS-CoV-2 and its influence on COVID-19 is not well defined. We describe clinical-radiological characteristics, the cytokine storm parameters, and the clinical evolution of a series of patients treated with dexamethasone in the disease's initial phase.

Method

A study of 8 patients who received dexamethasone before the development of COVID-19. We evaluate clinical variables, imaging tests, cytokine release parameters, treatment used and patient evolution.

Results

All patients received a 6 mg/day dose with a mean duration of 4.5 days before admission. High resolution computed tomography (HRCT) revealed that most of them presented a severe extension; most patients had a slightly elevated level of cytokine release parameters. Three patients required high-flow oxygen therapy due to respiratory failure; none required orotracheal intubation or died.

Conclusion

Dexamethasone in the early stages of SARS-CoV-2 infection appears to be associated with severe COVID-19.

An overview on tumor treating fields (TTFields) technology as a new potential subsidiary biophysical treatment for COVID-19

COVID-19 pandemic situation has affected millions of people with tens of thousands of deaths worldwide. Despite all efforts for finding drugs or vaccines, the key role for the survival of patients is still related to the immune system. Therefore, improving the efficacy and the functionality of the immune system of COVID-19 patients is very crucial. The potential new, non-invasive, FDA-approved biophysical technology that could be considered in this regard is tumor treating fields (TTFields) based on an alternating electric field has great biological effects. TTFields have significant effects in improving the functionality of dendritic cell, and cytotoxic T-cells, and these cells have a major role in defense against viral infection. Hence, applying TTFields could help COVID-19 patients against infection. Additionally, TTFields can reduce viral genomic replication, by reducing the expressions of some of the vital members of DNA replication complex genes from the minichromosome maintenance family (MCMs). These genes not only are involved in DNA replication but it has also been proven that they have a crucial role in viral replication. Also, TTFields suppress the formation of the network of tunneling nanotubes (TNTs) which is knows as filamentous (F)-actin-rich tubular structures. TNTs have a critical role in promoting the spread of viruses through improving viral entry and acting as a protective agent for viral components from immune cells and even pharmaceuticals. Moreover, TTFields enhance autophagy which leads to apoptosis of virally infected cells. Thus, it can be speculated that using TTFields may prove to be a promising approach as a subsidiary treatment of COVID-19.

Mesenchymal Stromal Cells: Potential Option for COVID-19 Treatment

The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted the way of life worldwide and continues to bring high mortality rates to at-risk groups. Patients who develop severe COVID-19 pneumonia, often complicated with ARDS, are left with limited treatment options with no targeted therapy currently available. One of the features of COVID-19 is an overaggressive immune reaction that leads to multiorgan failure. Mesenchymal stromal cell (MSC) treatment has been in development for various clinical indications for over a decade, with a safe side effect profile and promising results in preclinical and clinical trials. Therefore, the use of MSCs in COVID-19-induced respiratory failure and ARDS was a logical step in order to find a potential treatment option for the most severe patients. In this review, the main characteristics of MSCs, their proposed mechanism of action in COVID-19 treatment and the effect of this therapy in published case reports and clinical trials are discussed.

Kinetics of Nucleocapsid, Spike and Neutralizing Antibodies, and Viral Load in Patients with Severe COVID-19 Treated with Convalescent Plasma

COVID-19 is an ongoing pandemic with high morbidity and mortality. Despite meticulous research, only dexamethasone has shown consistent mortality reduction. Convalescent plasma (CP) infusion might also develop into a safe and effective treatment modality on the basis of recent studies and meta-analyses; however, little is known regarding the kinetics of antibodies in CP recipients. To evaluate the kinetics, we followed 31 CP recipients longitudinally enrolled at a median of 3 days post symptom onset for changes in binding and neutralizing antibody titers and viral loads. Antibodies against the complete trimeric Spike protein and the receptor-binding domain (Spike-RBD), as well as against the complete Nucleocapsid protein and the RNA binding domain (N-RBD) were determined at baseline and weekly following CP infusion. Neutralizing antibody (pseudotype NAb) titers were determined at the same time points. Viral loads were determined semi-quantitatively by SARS-CoV-2 PCR. Patients with low humoral responses at entry showed a robust increase of antibodies to all SARS-CoV-2 proteins and Nab, reaching peak levels within 2 weeks. The rapid increase in binding and neutralizing antibodies was paralleled by a concomitant clearance of the virus within the same timeframe. Patients with high humoral responses at entry demonstrated low or no further increases; however, virus clearance followed the same trajectory as in patients with low antibody response at baseline. Together, the sequential immunological and virological analysis of this well-defined cohort of patients early in infection shows the presence of high levels of binding and neutralizing antibodies and potent clearance of the virus.

A Comprehensive Overview on COVID-19: Future Perspectives

The outbreak of COVID-19 has proven to be an unprecedented disaster for the whole world. The virus has inflicted billion of lives across the globe in all aspects-physically, psychologically, as well as socially. Compared to the previous strains of β-CoV genera- MERS and SARS, SARS-CoV-2 has significantly higher transmissibility and worst post-recovery implications. A frequent mutation in the initial SARS-CoV-2 strain has been a major cause of mortalities (approx. 3 million deaths) and uncontrolled virulence (approx. 1 billion positive cases). As far as clinical manifestations are concerned, this particular virus has exhibited deleterious impacts on systems other than the respiratory system (primary target organ), such as the brain, hematological system, liver, kidneys, endocrine system, etc. with no promising curatives to date. Lack of emergency treatments and shortage of life-saving drugs has promoted the repurposing of existing therapeutics along with the emergence of vaccines with the combined efforts of scientists and industrial experts in this short span. This review summarizes every detail on COVID-19 and emphasizes undermining the future approaches to minimize its prevalence to the remaining lives.

COVID-19 and Tuberculosis Coinfection: An Overview of Case Reports/Case Series and Meta-Analysis

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and tuberculosis (TB) are two major infectious diseases posing significant public health threats, and their coinfection (aptly abbreviated COVID-TB) makes the situation worse. This study aimed to investigate the clinical features and prognosis of COVID-TB cases.

Methods: The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, CNKI, and Wanfang databases were searched for relevant studies published through December 18, 2020. An overview of COVID-TB case reports/case series was prepared that described their clinical characteristics and differences between survivors and deceased patients. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for death or severe COVID-19 were calculated. The quality of outcomes was assessed using GRADEpro.

Results: Thirty-six studies were included. Of 89 COVID-TB patients, 19 (23.46%) died, and 72 (80.90%) were male. The median age of non-survivors (53.95 ± 19.78 years) was greater than that of survivors (37.76 ± 15.54 years) (p < 0.001). Non-survivors were more likely to have hypertension (47.06 vs. 17.95%) or symptoms of dyspnea (72.73% vs. 30%) or bilateral lesions (73.68 vs. 47.14%), infiltrates (57.89 vs. 24.29%), tree in bud (10.53% vs. 0%), or a higher leucocyte count (12.9 [10.5–16.73] vs. 8.015 [4.8–8.97] × 10⁹/L) than survivors (p < 0.05). In terms of treatment, 88.52% received anti-TB therapy, 50.82% received antibiotics, 22.95% received antiviral therapy, 26.23% received hydroxychloroquine, and 11.48% received corticosteroids. The pooled ORs of death or severe disease in the COVID-TB group and the non-TB group were 2.21 (95% CI: 1.80, 2.70) and 2.77 (95% CI: 1.33, 5.74) (P < 0.01), respectively.

Conclusion: In summary, there appear to be some predictors of worse prognosis among COVID-TB cases. A moderate level of evidence suggests that COVID-TB patients are more likely to suffer severe disease or death than COVID-19 patients. Finally, routine screening for TB may be recommended among suspected or confirmed cases of COVID-19 in countries with high TB burden.

Effectiveness of corticosteroids to treat severe COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies

Objectives

To assess the effects of corticosteroid therapy for patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

Methods

We comprehensively searched articles published in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, China Biology Medicine (CBM), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang, and VIP databases from January 1, 2019, to March 20, 2021.

Results

A total of 6771 patients from eight prospective studies were included in our meta-analysis. The results showed that corticosteroid therapy was associated with lower mortality in severe COVID-19 (OR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.54–0.92, P = 0.009; I² = 54.5%). Since the proportion of the RECOVERY (Randomized Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy) trial included in the meta-analysis was as high as 71.88%, we removed it and recalculated the pooled OR. The results of the remaining seven studies still suggested such a survival benefit (OR = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.44–0.96, P = 0.030; I² = 59.8%). Furthermore, subgroup analysis suggested that the pooled OR of three studies using corticosteroids in the early stages of treatment was much lower (OR = 0.37, 95% CI = 0.25–0.57, P < 0.001; I² = 47.8%). However, after excluding the RECOVERY trial, the pooled OR of the remaining four studies with unspecific administration timing of corticosteroid therapy no longer supported this result (OR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.69–1.17, P = 0.415; I² = 0.0%).

Conclusions

In this meta-analysis, evidence based on seven randomized controlled trials and one prospective cohort study indicates that corticosteroid therapy was associated with a reduction in the mortality of severe COVID-19, especially when administered at an earlier time.

SARS-CoV-2: lessons from both the history of medicine and from the biological behavior of other well-known viruses

SARS-CoV-2 is the etiological agent of the current pandemic worldwide and its associated disease COVID-19. In this review, we have analyzed SARS-CoV-2 characteristics and those ones of other well-known RNA viruses viz. HIV, HCV and Influenza viruses, collecting their historical data, clinical manifestations and pathogenetic mechanisms. The aim of the work is obtaining useful insights and lessons for a better understanding of SARS-CoV-2. These pathogens present a distinct mode of transmission, as SARS-CoV-2 and Influenza viruses are airborne, whereas HIV and HCV are bloodborne. However, these viruses exhibit some potential similar clinical manifestations and pathogenetic mechanisms and their understanding may contribute to establishing preventive measures and new therapies against SARS-CoV-2.

Therapeutic Approaches in Modulating the Inflammatory and Immunological Response in Patients With Sepsis, Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome, and Pancreatitis: An Expert Opinion Review

Immunomodulation has long been an adjunct approach in treating critically ill patients with sepsis, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and acute pancreatitis (AP). Hyperactive immune response with immunopathogenesis leads to organ dysfunction and alters the clinical outcomes in critically ill. Though the immune response in the critically ill might have been overlooked, it has gathered greater attention during this novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Modulating hyperactive immune response, the cytokine storm, especially with steroids, has shown to improve the outcomes in COVID-19 patients. In this review, we find that immune response pathogenesis in critically ill patients with sepsis, ARDS, and AP is nearly similar. The use of immunomodulators such as steroids, broad-spectrum serine protease inhibitors such as ulinastatin, thymosin alpha, intravenous immunoglobulins, and therapies such as CytoSorb and therapeutic plasma exchange may help in improving the clinical outcomes in these conditions. As the experience of the majority of physicians in using such therapeutics may be limited, we provide our expert comments regarding immunomodulation to optimize outcomes in patients with sepsis/septic shock, ARDS, and AP.

Special Considerations in the Management of Autoimmune Hepatitis in COVID-19 Hotspots: A Review

The ongoing coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has necessitated special considerations in the management of diseases. The way presence of pre-existing diseases or treatment for it predisposes to, alters course of, and changes the management of COVID-19, is of relevance and is being extensively studied. Autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) is unique in that it is an autoimmune disease mandating treatment with immunosuppressive drugs, as well as a liver disease with potential for varying degrees of underlying fibrosis. The use of immunosuppressive drugs could alter the risk of acquiring COVID-19, the clinical course and severity of COVID-19 and the degree of underlying liver fibrosis could alter the clinical outcomes of patients with COVID-19. In this review, we try to summarize key areas relevant in understanding and improving the clinical care of patients with AIH in the current pandemic. Special considerations required in the management of patients with AIH in COVID-19 hotspots have been outlined based on the current evidence.

Risk Factors Associated with the Clinical Outcomes of COVID-19 and Its Variants in the Context of Cytokine Storm and Therapeutics/Vaccine Development Challenges

The recent appearance of SARS-CoV-2 is responsible for the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and has brought to light the importance of understanding this highly pathogenic agent to prevent future pandemics. This virus is from the same single-stranded positive-sense RNA family, Coronaviridae, as two other epidemic-causing viruses, SARS-CoV-1 and MERS-CoV. During this pandemic, one crucial focus highlighted by WHO has been to understand the risk factors that may contribute to disease severity and predict COVID-19 outcomes. In doing so, it is imperative to understand the virology of SARS-CoV-2 and the immunological response eliciting the clinical manifestation and progression of COVID-19. In this review, we provide clinical data-based analyses of how multiple risk factors (such as sex, race, HLA genotypes, blood groups, vitamin D deficiency, obesity, smoking, and asthma) contribute to the inflammatory overactivation and cytokine storm (frequently seen in COVID-19 patients) with a focus on the IL-6 pathway. We also draw comparisons to the virulence and pathophysiology of SARS and MERS to establish parallels in immune response and discuss the potential for therapeutic approaches that may limit disease progression in patients with higher risk profiles than others. Moreover, we cover the latest information on approved or upcoming COVID-19 vaccines. This paper also provides perspective on emerging variants and associated opportunistic infections such as black molds and fungus that have added to mortality in some parts of the world, such as India. This compilation of existing COVID-19 studies and data will provide an excellent referencing tool for the research, clinical, and public health communities.

Lessons Learned in Managing Patients with Colorectal Cancer During the COVID-19 Pandemic

OPINION STATEMENT

The COVID-19 pandemic forced us to rapidly and dramatically shift our medical priorities and decision making. With little literature or experience to rely on, the initial priority was to minimize patient exposure to the hospital and to others. It remains unclear whether cancer patients are at higher risk of infection or serious complications, or if it is our traditional therapies that place them to be at higher risk. By far, the greatest negative impact was on screening. Routine colonoscopies were considered elective, and as a result, delays in diagnosis will be felt for years to come. The most positive changes were the incorporation of tele-visits, increased use of oral therapies, alterations in treatment schedules of both chemotherapy and radiation, and an increased emphasis on neoadjuvant therapy. These too will be felt for years to come. The colorectal cancer medical community has responded collaboratively and effectively to maintain treatment and to optimize outcomes for our patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.

A Periaortitis Patient Who Succumbed to COVID-19 While Undergoing Systemic Steroid Therapy: A Case Report and Literature Review

BACKGROUND Periaortitis is an inflammatory condition that typically involves the infrarenal portion of the abdominal aorta. It is a rare disease usually occurring in middle-aged men. Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) is caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The published literature on the management of steroid therapy in patients with periaortitis and infected with SARS-CoV-2 is lacking. The balance between the indispensable anti-inflammatory properties of steroids and their adverse immunosuppressive characteristics remains unclear in the current COVID-19 scenario, and most of the current practices in managing potentially autoimmune aortic conditions are extrapolated from patients with rheumatological disorders contracting COVID19 while undergoing maintenance steroid therapy. CASE REPORT This report describes the case of a 62-year-old man who presented with nonspecific lower abdominal pain, unremarkable clinical exam, significantly elevated CRP level, and positive antinuclear antibody test. A CT scan showed mild aortic aneurysmal dilatation with periaortic soft tissue thickening, and a PET scan confirmed the finding, showing active abdominal periaortitis. Accordingly, he was diagnosed with autoimmune periaortitis and was maintained on a high dose of systemic corticosteroids (35 mg prednisolone/d). Eight weeks later, he was readmitted to the intensive care unit with worsening respiratory symptoms due to SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by PCR test, and unfortunately died 44 days later due to COVID-19-induced respiratory failure and sepsis. CONCLUSIONS The lack of an international consensus on the management of SARS-CoV-2-positive, steroid-dependent patients with serious inflammatory aortic conditions mandates further investigations and thoughtful review of the guidelines for the management of steroid-dependent patients contracting SARS-CoV-2 infection. Additionally, a comprehensive analysis of the outcomes of these patients is essential.

Systemic corticosteroids for the treatment of COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Systemic corticosteroids are used to treat people with COVID-19 because they counter hyper-inflammation. Existing evidence syntheses suggest a slight benefit on mortality. So far, systemic corticosteroids are one of the few treatment options for COVID-19. Nonetheless, size of effect, certainty of the evidence, optimal therapy regimen, and selection of patients who are likely to benefit most are factors that remain to be evaluated.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether systemic corticosteroids are effective and safe in the treatment of people with COVID-19, and to keep up to date with the evolving evidence base using a living systematic review approach.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register (which includes PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP, and medRxiv), Web of Science (Science Citation Index, Emerging Citation Index), and the WHO COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease to identify completed and ongoing studies to 16 April 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated systemic corticosteroids for people with COVID-19, irrespective of disease severity, participant age, gender or ethnicity.  We included any type or dose of systemic corticosteroids. We included the following comparisons: systemic corticosteroids plus standard care versus standard care (plus/minus placebo), dose comparisons, timing comparisons (early versus late), different types of corticosteroids and systemic corticosteroids versus other active substances.  We excluded studies that included populations with other coronavirus diseases (severe acute respiratory syndrome or Middle East respiratory syndrome), corticosteroids in combination with other active substances versus standard care, topical or inhaled corticosteroids, and corticosteroids for long-COVID treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methodology. To assess the risk of bias in included studies, we used the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' 2 tool for RCTs. We rated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach for the following outcomes: all-cause mortality, ventilator-free days, new need for invasive mechanical ventilation, quality of life, serious adverse events, adverse events, and hospital-acquired infections.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 RCTs in 8075 participants, of whom 7041 (87%) originated from high-income countries. A total of 3072 participants were randomised to corticosteroid arms and the majority received dexamethasone (n = 2322). We also identified 42 ongoing studies and 16 studies reported as being completed or terminated in a study registry, but without results yet.  Hospitalised individuals with a confirmed or suspected diagnosis of symptomatic COVID-19 Systemic corticosteroids plus standard care versus standard care plus/minus placebo  We included 10 RCTs (7989 participants), one of which did not report any of our pre-specified outcomes and thus our analysis included outcome data from nine studies.  All-cause mortality (at longest follow-up available): systemic corticosteroids plus standard care probably reduce all-cause mortality slightly in people with COVID-19 compared to standard care alone (median 28 days: risk difference of 30 in 1000 participants fewer than the control group rate of 275 in 1000 participants; risk ratio (RR) 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.80 to 1.00; 9 RCTs, 7930 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).  Ventilator-free days: corticosteroids may increase ventilator-free days (MD 2.6 days more than control group rate of 4 days, 95% CI 0.67 to 4.53; 1 RCT, 299 participants; low-certainty evidence). Ventilator-free days have inherent limitations as a composite endpoint and should be interpreted with caution.  New need for invasive ventilation: the evidence is of very low certainty. Because of high risk of bias arising from deaths that occurred before ventilation we are uncertain about the size and direction of the effects. Consequently, we did not perform analysis beyond the presentation of descriptive statistics.  Quality of life/neurological outcome: no data were available. Serious adverse events: we included data on two RCTs (678 participants) that evaluated systemic corticosteroids compared to standard care (plus/minus placebo); for adverse events and hospital-acquired infections, we included data on five RCTs (660 participants). Because of high risk of bias, heterogeneous definitions, and underreporting we are uncertain about the size and direction of the effects. Consequently, we did not perform analysis beyond the presentation of descriptive statistics (very low-certainty evidence).    Different types, dosages or timing of systemic corticosteroids  We identified one study that compared methylprednisolone with dexamethasone. The evidence for mortality and new need for invasive mechanical ventilation is very low certainty due to the small number of participants (n = 86). No data were available for the other outcomes. We did not identify comparisons of different dosages or timing. Outpatients with asymptomatic or mild disease Currently, there are no studies published in populations with asymptomatic infection or mild disease.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Moderate-certainty evidence shows that systemic corticosteroids probably slightly reduce all-cause mortality in people hospitalised because of symptomatic COVID-19. Low-certainty evidence suggests that there may also be a reduction in ventilator-free days. Since we are unable to  adjust for the impact of early death on subsequent endpoints, the findings for ventilation outcomes and harms have limited applicability to inform treatment decisions. Currently, there is no evidence for asymptomatic or mild disease (non-hospitalised participants).  There is an urgent need for good-quality evidence for specific subgroups of disease severity, for which we propose level of respiratory support at randomisation. This applies to the comparison or subgroups of different types and doses of corticosteroids, too. Outcomes apart from mortality should be measured and analysed appropriately taking into account confounding through death if applicable.  We identified 42 ongoing and 16 completed but not published RCTs in trials registries suggesting possible changes of effect estimates and certainty of the evidence in the future. Most ongoing studies target people who need respiratory support at baseline. With the living approach of this review, we will continue to update our search and include eligible trials and published data.

Efficacy and Safety of Corticosteroid Use in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction

We conducted a comprehensive literature review to synthesize evidence for the relationship between corticosteroid use and mortality in patients with COVID-19.

Methods

The PUBMED, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched from inception to March 13, 2021. We searched and analyzed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies (OSs) that examined corticosteroid use in patients with COVID-19. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality, while the secondary outcome was the need for mechanical ventilation (MV) and serious adverse events.

Results

A total of 11 RCTs and 44 OSs involving 7893 and 41,164 patients with COVID-19 were included in the study. Corticosteroid use was associated with lower COVID-19 mortality in RCTs, but was not statistically significant (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.77–1.07; I² = 63.4%). The subgroup analysis of pulse dose corticosteroid showed survival benefit statistically (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.15–0.56). Moreover, the corticosteroid use may reduce the need for MV (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.51–0.90; I² = 7.5%) with no significant increase in serious adverse reactions (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.30–2.37; I² = 33.3%). In addition, the included OSs showed that the pulse dose (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.45–0.95; I² = 30.8%) might lower the mortality in patients with COVID-19. The pulse dose of methylprednisolone (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.45–0.80; I² = 0%) had a beneficial effect on survival. It was especially significant when the duration of pulse methylprednisolone use was less than 7 days (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.43–0.80; I² = 0%).

Conclusions

This meta-analysis indicated that corticosteroid use might cause a slight reduction in COVID-19 mortality. However, it could significantly reduce the MV requirement in patients with COVID-19 and restrict serious adverse events. Additionally, the pulse dose of methylprednisolone for less than 7 days may be a good treatment choice for patients with COVID-19.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40121-021-00518-3.

An observational cohort study to assess N-acetylglucosamine for COVID-19 treatment in the inpatient setting

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has affected millions globally, with a continued need for effective treatments. N-acetylglucosamine has anti-inflammatory activities and modulates immune response. This study evaluated whether N-acetylglucosamine administered orally improves clinical outcomes for patients admitted to the hospital due to COVID-19.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This single-center, prospective, observational cohort study used a retrospective control group for comparison. Multivariate analyses evaluated whether N-acetylglucosamine was an independent predictor of primary outcomes (rate of intubation, hospital length-of-stay, and mortality) and select secondary outcomes (intensive care unit [ICU] admission, ICU length-of-stay, supplemental oxygen use duration, hospice initiation, and poor clinical outcome [defined as combined hospice initiation/death]).

RESULTS

Of the 50 patients enrolled in the N-acetylglucosamine treatment group, 48 patients had follow-up data (50.0% [24/48] male; median age 63 years, range: 29-88). Multivariate analysis showed the treatment group had improved hospital length-of-stay (β: 4.27 [95% confidence interval (CI) -5.67; -2.85], p < 0.001), ICU admission (odds ratio [OR] 0.32 [95% CI 0.10; 0.96], p = 0.049), and poor clinical outcome (OR 0.30 [95% CI 0.09; 0.86], p = 0.034). Mortality was significantly lower for treatment versus control on univariate analysis (12.5% vs. 28.0%, respectively; p = 0.039) and approached significance on multivariate analysis (p = 0.081).

CONCLUSIONS

N-acetylglucosamine administration was associated with reduced hospital length-of-stay, ICU admission rates, and death/hospice rates in adults with COVID-19 compared to those who received standard care alone. An upcoming trial will further investigate N-acetylglucosamine's effects.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT04706416.

Case series of COVID-19 in patients with myasthenia gravis: a single institution experience

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the late 2019 outbreak of Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), causes a respiratory disease which could put myasthenia gravis patients at a greater risk of developing severe disease course. This paper presents a single-institution case series of hospitalized myasthenia gravis patients with COVID 19. We identified eight patients previously diagnosed with myasthenia gravis, four of whom presented with clear signs of myasthenia gravis symptom worsening on admission. No form of respiratory support was needed during the complete duration of stay for three patients, oxygen therapy was administered to two patients, while the remaining three patients required mechanical ventilation. Treatment was successful for seven patients, six of whom were discharged without any myasthenia gravis symptoms. One patient died after eleven days of intensive care unit treatment. Although treatment of patients with myasthenia gravis and COVID-19 patients is challenging, case series of myasthenia gravis patients with COVID-19 treated in our institution demonstrates relatively favorable treatment outcome. Our data seem to support the notion that immunosuppressive medication does not seem to result in worse outcomes. Our data also support the notion that intravenous immunoglobulin treatment is safe and should be administered to patients with myasthenia gravis and COVID-19 in case of myasthenia gravis worsening since benefits seem to greatly outweigh the risks.

Promising Immunotherapies against COVID-19

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has led to a severe pandemic and deeply affected the livelihood of people worldwide. In response to the pandemic, researchers have been rapidly studying different aspects of COVID-19, such as virus detection, vaccinations, and epidemiological aspects of the disease. It has been reported that SARS-CoV-2 can induce uncontrolled inflammation and cause a lack of antiviral response, thereby aggravating the disease. Therefore, recovery of immune functions is key to COVID-19 treatment. Many clinical trials are exploring suitable therapies, and some progress has been made. Early administration of interferons may prevent COVID-19 exacerbation and/or promotes recovery from the diseases. Inhibitors of inflammation can prevent cytokine storms and multi-organ damage. Convalescent plasma containing neutralizing antibodies has played an important role in therapeutic options at the beginning of the pandemic owing to the lack of other effective methods. To aid the development of treatment options for COVID-19, this review focuses on immunotherapies, including treatment with interferons, inhibition of pro-inflammatory mechanisms, and the use of convalescent plasma.

Impact of Systemic Corticosteroids on Mortality in Older Adults With Critical COVID-19 Pneumonia

Background

The most susceptible population group to critical and fatal coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is older adults. In SARS-CoV-2 infection, the host immune response is thought to play a key role in the pathophysiological effects of lung damage. Therefore, corticosteroid therapy could modulate inflammation-mediated pulmonary injury and thereby reduce progression to severe respiratory failure and death. The aim of this study was to analyse the safety and clinical efficacy of corticosteroid therapy in older adults with severe COVID-19 pneumonia.

Method

We reviewed the clinical records of confirmed COVID-19 patients aged 75 years or older admitted to our hospital over a three months period (March 1, to May 31, 2020). A total of 143 patients were included in the study cohort. From 2 April, 2020, in accordance with World Health Organization (WHO) guidance on COVID-19, our hospital protocol added corticosteroid for COVID-19 treatment. We compared in-hospital mortality among patients with critical COVID-19 who received corticosteroids therapy and those who did not.

Results

88 patients (61.5%) were treated with corticosteroids, and 55 patients (38.4%) were not. Both groups were similar in baseline characteristics. The median age was 85 years (IQR, 82–89), and 61.5% (88/143) were male. In-hospital mortality was lower in the corticosteroid group (68.2%) compared with patients in the non-corticosteroid group (81.8%). Treatment with corticosteroids was an independent survival factor (HR=0.61; 95% CI, 0.41–0.93; P=0.006).

Conclusions

In critically ill older adults with COVID-19 pneumonia, the use of corticosteroid treatment resulted in lower mortality without severe adverse events.