Recommendations for antibacterial therapy in adults with COVID-19 - an evidence based guideline

Timing and prediction of secondary bacteremia in patients with COVID-19: A retrospective cohort study

Background

We aimed to aid the appropriate use of antimicrobial agents by determining the timing of secondary bacteremia and validating and updating clinical prediction models for bacteremia in patients with COVID-19.

Methods

We performed a retrospective cohort study on all hospitalized patients diagnosed with COVID-19 who underwent blood culture tests from January 1, 2020, and September 30, 2021, at an urban teaching hospital in Japan. The primary outcome measure was secondary bacteremia in patients with COVID-19.

Results

Of the 507 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, 169 underwent blood culture tests. Eleven of them had secondary bacteremia. The majority of secondary bacteremia occurred on or later than the 9th day after symptom onset. Positive blood culture samples collected on day 9 or later after disease onset had an odds ratio of 22.4 (95% CI 2.76-181.2, p < 0.001) compared with those collected less than 9 days after onset. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the modified Shapiro rule combined with blood culture collection on or after the 9th day from onset was 0.919 (95% CI, 0.843-0.995), and the net benefit was high according to the decision curve analysis.

Conclusions

The timings of symptom onset and hospital admission may be valuable indicators for making a clinical decision to perform blood cultures in patients hospitalized with COVID-19.

Disruption of hospital care during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic impacted socioeconomic groups differently: population based study using routine registration data

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic, provision of non-COVID healthcare was recurrently severely disrupted. The objective was to determine whether disruption of non-COVID hospital use, either due to cancelled, postponed, or forgone care, during the first pandemic year of COVID-19 impacted socioeconomic groups differently compared with pre-pandemic use.

METHODS

National population registry data, individually linked with data of non-COVID hospital use in the Netherlands (2017-2020). in non-institutionalised population of 25-79 years, in standardised household income deciles (1 = low, 10 = high) as proxy for socioeconomic status. Generic outcome measures included patients who received hospital care (dichotomous): outpatient contact, day treatment, inpatient clinic, and surgery. Specific procedures were included as examples of frequently performed elective and acute procedures, e.g.: elective knee/hip replacement and cataract surgery, and acute percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). Relative risks (RR) for hospital use were reported as outcomes from generalised linear regression models (binomial) with log-link. An interaction term was included to assess whether income differences in hospital use during the pandemic deviated from pre-pandemic use.

RESULTS

Hospital use rates declined in 2020 across all income groups. With baseline (2019) higher hospital use rates among lower than higher income groups, relatively stronger declines were found for lower income groups. The lowest income groups experienced a 10% larger decline in surgery received than the highest income group (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.87 - 0.93). Patterns were similar for inpatient clinic, elective knee/hip replacement and cataract surgery. We found small or no significant income differences for outpatient clinic, day treatment, and acute PCI.

CONCLUSIONS

Disruption of non-COVID hospital use in 2020 was substantial across all income groups during the acute phases of the pandemic, but relatively stronger for lower income groups than could be expected compared with pre-pandemic hospital use. Although the pandemic's impact on the health system was unprecedented, healthcare service shortages are here to stay. It is therefore pivotal to realise that lower income groups may be at risk for underuse in times of scarcity.

Host transcriptomics and machine learning for secondary bacterial infections in patients with COVID-19: a prospective, observational cohort study

BACKGROUND

Viral respiratory tract infections are frequently complicated by secondary bacterial infections. This study aimed to use machine learning to predict the risk of bacterial superinfection in SARS-CoV-2-positive individuals.

METHODS

In this prospective, multicentre, observational cohort study done in nine centres in six countries (Australia, Indonesia, Singapore, Italy, Czechia, and France) blood samples and RNA sequencing were used to develop a robust model of predicting secondary bacterial infections in the respiratory tract of patients with COVID-19. Eligible participants were older than 18 years, had known or suspected COVID-19, and symptoms of a recent respiratory infection. A control cohort of participants without COVID-19 who were older than 18 years and with no infection symptoms was also recruited from one Australian centre. In the pre-analysis phase, data were filtered to include only individuals with complete blood transcriptomics and patient data (ie, age, sex, location, and WHO severity score at the time of sample collection). The dataset was then divided randomly (4:1) into a training set (80%) and a test set (20%). Gene expression data in the training set and control cohort were used for differential expression analysis. Differentially expressed genes, along with WHO severity score, location, age, and sex, were used for feature selection with least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) in the training set. For LASSO analysis, samples were excluded if gene expression data were not obtained at study admission, no longitudinal clinical information was available, a bacterial infection at the time of study admission was present, or a fungal infection in the absence of a bacterial infection was detected. LASSO regression was performed using three subsets of predictor variables: patient data alone, gene expression data alone, or a combination of patient data and gene expression data. The accuracy of the resultant models was tested on data from the test set.

FINDINGS

Between March, 2020, and October, 2021, we recruited 536 SARS-CoV-2-positive individuals and between June, 2013, and January, 2020, we recruited 74 participants into the control cohort. After prefiltering analysis and other exclusions, samples from 158 individuals were analysed in the training set and 47 in the test set. The expression of seven host genes (DAPP1, CST3, FGL2, GCH1, CIITA, UPP1, and RN7SL1) in the blood at the time of study admission was identified by LASSO as predictive of the risk of developing a secondary bacterial infection of the respiratory tract more than 24 h after study admission. Specifically, the expression of these genes in combination with a patient's WHO severity score at the time of study enrolment resulted in an area under the curve of 0·98 (95% CI 0·89-1·00), a true positive rate (sensitivity) of 1·00 (95% CI 1·00-1·00), and a true negative rate (specificity) of 0·94 (95% CI 0·89-1·00) in the test cohort. The combination of patient data and host transcriptomics at hospital admission identified all seven individuals in the training and test sets who developed a bacterial infection of the respiratory tract 5-9 days after hospital admission.

INTERPRETATION

These data raise the possibility that host transcriptomics at the time of clinical presentation, together with machine learning, can forward predict the risk of secondary bacterial infections and allow for the more targeted use of antibiotics in viral infection.

FUNDING

Snow Medical Research Foundation, the National Health and Medical Research Council, the Jack Ma Foundation, the Helmholtz-Association, the A2 Milk Company, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, and the Fondazione AIRC Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca contro il Cancro.

Risk factors, outcomes, and epidemiological and etiological study of hospitalized COVID-19 patients with bacterial co-infection and secondary infections

BACKGROUND

As a common complication of viral respiratory tract infection, bacterial infection was associated with higher mortality and morbidity. Determining the prevalence, culprit pathogens, outcomes, and risk factors of co-infection and secondary infection occurring in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) will be beneficial for better antibiotic management.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort research, we assessed clinical characteristics, laboratory parameters, microbiologic results, and outcomes of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 patients with bacterial co-infection and secondary infection in West China Hospital from 2022 December 2nd to 2023 March 15th.

RESULTS

The incidence of bacterial co-infection and secondary infection, as defined by positive culture results of clinical specimens, was 16.3% (178/1091) and 10.1% (110/1091) respectively among 1091 patients. Acinetobacter, Klebsiella, and Pseudomonas were the most commonly identified bacteria in respiratory tract samples of COVID-19 patients. In-hospital mortality of COVID-19 patients with co-infection (17.4% vs 9.5%, p = 0.003) and secondary infection (28.2% vs 9.5%, p < 0.001) greatly exceeded that of COVID-19 patients without bacterial infection. Cardiovascular disease (1.847 (1.202-2.837), p = 0.005), severe COVID-19 (1.694 (1.033-2.778), p = 0.037), and critical COVID-19 (2.220 (1.196-4.121), p = 0.012) were proved to be risk factors for bacterial co-infection, while only critical COVID-19 (1.847 (1.202-2.837), p = 0.005) was closely related to secondary infection.

CONCLUSIONS

Bacterial co-infection and secondary infection could aggravate the disease severity and worsen clinical outcomes of COVID-19 patients. Notably, only critical COVID-19 subtype was proved to be an independent risk factor for both co-infection and secondary infection. Therefore, standard empirical antibiotics was recommended for critically ill COVID-19 rather than all the inpatients according to our research.

Early empiric antibiotic use in COVID-19 patients: results from the international VIRUS registry

OBJECTIVES

COVID-19 escalated inappropriate antibiotic use. We determined the distribution of pathogens causing community-acquired co-infections, the rate, and factors associated with early empiric antibiotic (EEAB) treatment among hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

The Society of Critical Care Medicine Discovery Viral Infection and Respiratory Illness Universal Study (VIRUS) COVID-19 Registry including 68,428 patients from 28 countries enrolled between January 2020 and October 2021 were screened. After exclusions, 7830 patients were included in the analysis. Azithromycin and/or other antibiotic treatment given within the first 3 days of hospitalization was investigated. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine factors associated with EEAB use.

RESULTS

The majority (6214, 79.4%) of patients received EEAB, with azithromycin combination being the most frequent (3146, 40.2%). As the pandemic advanced, the proportion of patients receiving EEAB regressed from 84.4% (786/931) in January-March 2020 to 65.2% (30/46) in April-June 2021 (P < 0.001). Beta-lactams, especially ceftriaxone was the most commonly used antibiotic. Staphylococcus aureus was the most commonly isolated pathogen. Multivariate analysis showed geographical location and pandemic timeline as the strongest independent predictors of EEAB use.

CONCLUSIONS

EEAB administration decreased as pandemic advanced, which may be the result of intensified antimicrobial stewardship efforts. Our study provides worldwide goals for antimicrobial stewardship programs in the post-COVID-19 era.

Drug prescription patterns and their association with mortality and hospitalization duration in COVID-19 patients: insights from big data

Background

Different medication prescription patterns have been associated with varying course of disease and outcomes in COVID-19. Health claims data is a rich source of information on disease treatment and outcomes. We aimed to investigate drug prescription patterns and their association with mortality and hospitalization via insurance data for a relatively long period of the pandemic in Iran.

Methods

We retrieved hospitalized patients' data from Iran Health Insurance Organization (IHIO) spanning 26 months (2020-2022) nationwide. Included were patients with ICD-10 codes U07.1/U07.2 for confirmed/suspected COVID-19. A case was defined as a single hospitalization event for an individual patient. Multiple hospitalizations of a patient within a 30-day interval were aggregated into a single case, while hospitalizations with intervals exceeding 30 days were treated as independent cases. The Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) was used for medications classification. The two main study outcomes were general and intensive care unit (ICU) hospitalization periods and mortality. Besides, various demographic and clinical associate factors were analyzed to derive the associations with medication prescription patterns and study outcomes using accelerated failure time (AFT) and logistic regression models.

Results

During the 26 months of the study period, 1,113,678 admissions with COVID-19 diagnosis at hospitals working in company with IHIO were recorded. 917,198 cases were detected from the database, among which 51.91% were females and 48.09% were males. Among the main groups of medications, antithrombotics (55.84% [95% CI: 55.74-55.94]), corticosteroids (54.14% [54.04-54.24]), and antibiotics (42.22% [42.12-42.32]) were the top used medications among cases with COVID-19. Investigation of the duration of hospitalization based on main medication groups showed antithrombotics (adjusted median ratio = 0.94 [0.94-0.95]) were significantly associated with shorter periods of overall hospitalization. Also, antithrombotics (adjusted odds ratio = 0.74 [95%CI, 0.73-0.76]), corticosteroids (0.97 [0.95-0.99]), antivirals (0.82 [0.80-0.83]), and ACE inhibitor/ARB (0.79 [0.77-0.80]) were significantly associated with lower mortality.

Conclusion

Over 2 years of investigation, antithrombotics, corticosteroids, and antibiotics were the top medications for hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Trends in medication prescription varied based on various factors across the country. Medication prescriptions could potentially significantly impact the trends of mortality and hospitalization during epidemics, thereby affecting both health and economic burdens.

Prevalence of pharmaceuticals and personal care products, microplastics and co-infecting microbes in the post-COVID-19 era and its implications on antimicrobial resistance and potential endocrine disruptive effects

The COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic's steady condition coupled with predominance of emerging contaminants in the environment and its synergistic implications in recent times has stoked interest in combating medical emergencies in this dynamic environment. In this context, high concentrations of pharmaceutical and personal care products (PPCPs), microplastics (MPs), antimicrobial resistance (AMR), and soaring coinfecting microbes, tied with potential endocrine disruptive (ED) are critical environmental concerns that requires a detailed documentation and analysis. During the pandemic, the identification, enumeration, and assessment of potential hazards of PPCPs and MPs and (used as anti-COVID-19 agents/applications) in aquatic habitats have been attempted globally. Albeit receding threats in the magnitude of COVID-19 infections, both these pollutants have still posed serious consequences to aquatic ecosystems and the very health and hygiene of the population in the vicinity. The surge in the contaminants post-COVID also renders them to be potent vectors to harbor and amplify AMR. Pertinently, the present work attempts to critically review such instances to understand the underlying mechanism, interactions swaying the current health of our environment during this post-COVID-19 era. During this juncture, although prevention of diseases, patient care, and self-hygiene have taken precedence, nevertheless antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) efforts have been overlooked. Unnecessary usage of PPCPs and plastics during the pandemic has resulted in increased emerging contaminants (i.e., active pharmaceutical ingredients and MPs) in various environmental matrices. It was also noticed that among COVID-19 patients, while the bacterial co-infection prevalence was 0.2-51%, the fungi, viral, protozoan and helminth were 0.3-49, 1-22, 2-15, 0.4-15% respectively, rendering them resistant to residual PPCPs. There are inevitable chances of ED effects from PPCPs and MPs applied previously, that could pose far-reaching health concerns. Furthermore, clinical and other experimental evidence for many newer compounds is very scarce and demands further research. Pro-active measures targeting effective waste management, evolved environmental policies aiding strict regulatory measures, and scientific research would be crucial in minimizing the impact and creating better preparedness towards such events among the masses fostering sustainability.

Antibiotic prescribing guideline recommendations in COVID-19: a systematic survey

Background

COVID-19 and antimicrobial resistance (AMR) are two intersecting public health crises. Antimicrobial overuse in patients with COVID-19 threatens to worsen AMR. Guidelines are fundamental in encouraging antimicrobial stewardship. We sought to assess the quality of antibiotic prescribing guidelines and recommendations in the context of COVID-19, and whether they incorporate principles of antimicrobial stewardship.

Methods

We performed a systematic survey which included a search using the concepts "antibiotic/antimicrobial" up to November 15, 2022 of the eCOVID-19 living map of recommendations (RecMap) which aggregates guidelines across a range of international sources and all languages. Guidelines providing explicit recommendations regarding antibacterial use in COVID-19 were eligible for inclusion. Guideline and recommendation quality were assessed using the AGREE II and AGREE-REX instruments, respectively. We extracted guideline characteristics including panel representation and the presence or absence of explicit statements related to antimicrobial stewardship (i.e., judicious antibiotic use, antimicrobial resistance or adverse effects as a consequence of antibiotic use). We used logistic regression to evaluate the relationship between guideline characteristics including quality and incorporation of antimicrobial stewardship principles. Protocol registration (OSF): https://osf.io/4pgtc.

Findings

Twenty-eight guidelines with 63 antibiotic prescribing recommendations were included. Recommendations focused on antibiotic initiation (n = 52, 83%) and less commonly antibiotic selection (n = 13, 21%), and duration of therapy (n = 15, 24%). Guideline and recommendation quality varied widely. Twenty (71%) guidelines incorporated at least one concept relating to antimicrobial stewardship. Including infectious diseases expertise on the guideline panel (OR 9.44, 97.5% CI: 1.09-81.59) and AGREE-REX score (OR 3.26, 97.5% CI: 1.14-9.31 per 10% increase in overall score) were associated with a higher odds of guidelines addressing antimicrobial stewardship.

Interpretation

There is an opportunity to improve antibiotic prescribing guidelines in terms of both quality and incorporation of antimicrobial stewardship principles. These findings can help guideline developers better address antibiotic stewardship in future recommendations beyond COVID-19.

Funding

This project was funded by Michael G. DeGroote Cochrane Canada and McMaster GRADE centres.

Antibiotics and nano-antibiotics in treatment of lung infection: In management of COVID-19

The world has witnessed the cruelty of COVID-19 disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The association of COVID-19 with other secondary and bacterial co-infections has tremendously contributed to lung infections. An increased probability of having a secondary lung infection was observed among the post-COVID patients. The treatment of antibiotics has ameliorated the mortality rate. However, the stewardship of antibiotic treatment was linked to increased organ failure. Therefore, the paper discusses the interactions between the virus and host through the ACE2 receptors that contribute to COVID-19 development. Furthermore, the paper provides an invaluable compendium history of SARS-CoV-2 genomic composition. It revolves around most classes of antibiotics used to treat COVID-19 disease and post-COVID lung infections with the complete mechanism. This binds with the exertion of the antibiotics for bacterial infection associated with COVID-19 patients and how beneficial and effective responses have been recorded for the treatment. The application of nanotechnology and possible approaches of nanomedicines is also discussed to its potential usage.

Inhibitors of SARS-CoV-2 main protease: Biological efficacy and toxicity aspects

The emergence of the highly contagious respiratory disease, COVID-19, caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has become a significant global public health concern. To combat this virus, researchers have focused on developing antiviral strategies that target specific viral components, such as the main protease (Mpro), which plays a crucial role in SARS-CoV-2 replication. While many compounds have been identified as potent inhibitors of Mpro, only a few have been translated into clinical use due to the potential risk-benefit trade-offs. Development of systemic inflammatory response and bacterial co-infection in patients belong to severe, frequent complications of COVID-19. In this context, we analysed available data on the anti-inflammatory and antibacterial activities of the SARS-CoV-2 Mpro inhibitors for possible implementation in the treatment of complicated and long COVID-19 cases. Synthetic feasibility and ADME properties were calculated and included for better characterisation of the compounds' predicted toxicity. Analysis of the collected data resulted in several clusters pointing to the most prospective compounds for further study and design. The complete tables with collected data are attached in Supplementary material for use by other researchers.

Using risk factors and markers to predict bacterial respiratory co-/superinfections in COVID-19 patients: is the antibiotic steward's toolbox full or empty?

BACKGROUND

Adequate diagnosis of bacterial respiratory tract co-/superinfection (bRTI) in coronavirus disease (COVID-19) patients is challenging, as there is insufficient knowledge about the role of risk factors and (para)clinical parameters in the identification of bacterial co-/superinfection in the COVID-19 setting. Empirical antibiotic therapy is mainly based on COVID-19 severity and expert opinion, rather than on scientific evidence generated since the start of the pandemic.

PURPOSE

We report the best available evidence regarding the predictive value of risk factors and (para)clinical markers in the diagnosis of bRTI in COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary team identified different potential risk factors and (para)clinical predictors of bRTI in COVID-19 and formulated one or two research questions per topic. After a thorough literature search, research gaps were identified, and suggestions concerning further research were formulated. The quality of this narrative review was ensured by following the Scale for the Assessment of Narrative Review Articles.

RESULTS

Taking into account the scarcity of scientific evidence for markers and risk factors of bRTI in COVID-19 patients, to date, COVID-19 severity is the only parameter which can be associated with higher risk of developing bRTI.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence on the usefulness of risk factors and (para)clinical factors as predictors of bRTI in COVID-19 patients is scarce. Robust studies are needed to optimise antibiotic prescribing and stewardship activities in the context of COVID-19.

Pre-Existing Allergies Patients with Higher Viral Load and Longer Recovery Days Infected by SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.2 in Shanghai, China, 2022

Background

It is not known whether the viral load and the number of days to negative nucleic acid increased in patients with a history of allergy during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Objective

To investigate the impact of allergy labels on SARS-CoV-2 Omicron outcomes.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study included 62,293 patients with mild Omicron infection between April 9, 2022, and May 31, 2022. Using 1:2 propensity score matching, we identified 2177 COVID-19 patients with a history of allergy and 4254 COVID-19 patients with no history of allergy. The differences in viral load, days to nucleic acid turning negative, and clinical symptoms were compared between the two groups.

Results

Compared with the group with no allergies, the number of days before negative nucleic acid conversion of COVID-19 patients with allergies was significantly higher, the viral load was significantly higher, and the cumulative negative conversion rates at 5-10 days were all lower (p < 0.01). Patients with a history of allergy to antibiotics had higher viral load and more days with negative nucleic acid levels (p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis revealed that the viral load in penicillin-allergic and cephalosporins-allergic patients was significantly compared to patients without any history of allergies (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

Patients with a history of allergy have a more significant viral load and a longer duration of nucleic acid negative conversion upon COVID-19 infection, particularly those allergic to antibiotics.

Procalcitonin-Guided Antibiotic Prescription in Patients With COVID-19: A Multicenter Observational Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Despite the low rate of bacterial coinfection, antibiotics are very commonly prescribed in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Does the use of a procalcitonin (PCT)-guided antibiotic protocol safely reduce the use of antibiotics in patients with a COVID-19 infection?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

In this multicenter cohort, three groups of patients with COVID-19 were compared in terms of antibiotic consumption, namely one group treated based on a PCT-algorithm in one hospital (n = 216) and two control groups, consisting of patients from the same hospital (n = 57) and of patients from three similar hospitals (n = 486) without PCT measurements during the same period. The primary end point was antibiotic prescription in the first week of admission.

RESULTS

Antibiotic prescription during the first 7 days was 26.8% in the PCT group, 43.9% in the non-PCT group in the same hospital, and 44.7% in the non-PCT group in other hospitals. Patients in the PCT group had lower odds of receiving antibiotics in the first 7 days of admission (OR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.16-0.66 compared with the same hospital; OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.28-0.62 compared with the other hospitals). The proportion of patients receiving antibiotic prescription during the total admission was 35.2%, 43.9%, and 54.5%, respectively. The PCT group had lower odds of receiving antibiotics during the total admission only when compared with the other hospitals (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.08-0.63). There were no significant differences in other secondary end points, except for readmission in the PCT group vs the other hospitals group.

INTERPRETATION

PCT-guided antibiotic prescription reduces antibiotic prescription rates in hospitalized patients with COVID-19, without major safety concerns.

Comparison of COVID-19 with influenza A in the ICU: a territory-wide, retrospective, propensity matched cohort on mortality and length of stay

OBJECTIVES

Direct comparisons between COVID-19 and influenza A in the critical care setting are limited. The objective of this study was to compare their outcomes and identify risk factors for hospital mortality.

DESIGN AND SETTING

This was a territory-wide, retrospective study on all adult (≥18 years old) patients admitted to public hospital intensive care units in Hong Kong. We compared COVID-19 patients admitted between 27 January 2020 and 26 January 2021 with a propensity-matched historical cohort of influenza A patients admitted between 27 January 2015 and 26 January 2020. We reported outcomes of hospital mortality and time to death or discharge. Multivariate analysis using Poisson regression and relative risk (RR) was used to identify risk factors for hospital mortality.

RESULTS

After propensity matching, 373 COVID-19 and 373 influenza A patients were evenly matched for baseline characteristics. COVID-19 patients had higher unadjusted hospital mortality than influenza A patients (17.5% vs 7.5%, p<0.001). The Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation IV (APACHE IV) adjusted standardised mortality ratio was also higher for COVID-19 than influenza A patients ((0.79 (95% CI 0.61 to 1.00) vs 0.42 (95% CI 0.28 to 0.60)), p<0.001). Adjusting for age, P_aO₂/F_iO₂, Charlson Comorbidity Index and APACHE IV, COVID-19 (adjusted RR 2.26 (95% CI 1.52 to 3.36)) and early bacterial-viral coinfection (adjusted RR 1.66 (95% CI 1.17 to 2.37)) were directly associated with hospital mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Critically ill patients with COVID-19 had substantially higher hospital mortality when compared with propensity-matched patients with influenza A.

Evolution of National Guidelines on Medicines Used to Treat COVID-19 in Pregnancy in 2020-2022: A Scoping Review

The lack of inclusion of pregnant women in clinical trials evaluating the effectiveness of medicines to treat COVID-19 has made it difficult to establish evidence-based treatment guidelines for pregnant women. Our aim was to provide a review of the evolution and updates of the national guidelines on medicines used in pregnant women with COVID-19 published by the obstetrician and gynecologists' societies in thirteen countries in 2020-2022. Based on the results of the RECOVERY (Randomized Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy) trial, the national societies successively recommended against prescribing hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir-ritonavir and azithromycin. Guidelines for remdesivir differed completely between countries, from compassionate or conditional use to recommendation against. Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir was authorized in Australia and the UK only in research settings and was no longer recommended in the UK at the end of 2022. After initial reluctance to use corticosteroids, the results of the RECOVERY trial have enabled the recommendation of dexamethasone in case of severe COVID-19 since mid-2020. Some societies recommended prescribing tocilizumab to pregnant patients with hypoxia and systemic inflammation from June 2021. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies were authorized at the end of 2021 with conditional use in some countries, and then no longer recommended in Belgium and the USA at the end of 2022. The gradual convergence of the recommendations, although delayed compared to the general population, highlights the importance of the inclusion of pregnant women in clinical trials and of international collaboration to improve the pharmacological treatment of pregnant women with COVID-19.

COVID-19 and Pregnancy: An Updated Review about Evidence-Based Therapeutic Strategies

The COVID-19 pandemic posed a significant challenge for clinicians in managing pregnant women, who were at high risk of virus transmission and severe illness. While the WHO declared in May 2023 that COVID-19 is no longer a public health emergency, it emphasized that it remains a global health threat. Despite the success of vaccines, the possibility of new pandemic waves due to viral mutations should be considered. Ongoing assessment of the safety and effectiveness of pharmacological therapies is crucial in clinical practice. This narrative review summarizes the evidence-based therapeutic strategies for pregnant women with COVID-19, considering over three years of pandemic experience. The review discusses the safety and effectiveness of various drug regimens (antivirals, anticoagulants, corticosteroids, immunoglobulins, monoclonal antibodies, and therapeutic gases) and procedures (prone positioning and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation). Drugs with contraindications, inefficacy during pregnancy, or unknown adverse effects were excluded from our evaluation. The aim is to provide healthcare professionals with a comprehensive guide for managing pregnant women with COVID-19 based on lessons learned from the pandemic outbreak.

Incidence of bloodstream infections due to multidrug-resistant pathogens in ordinary wards and intensive care units before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: a real-life, retrospective observational study

PURPOSE

SARS-COV-2 pandemic led to antibiotic overprescription and unprecedented stress on healthcare systems worldwide. Knowing the comparative incident risk of bloodstream infection due to multidrug-resistant pathogens in COVID ordinary wards and intensive care-units may give insights into the impact of COVID-19 on antimicrobial resistance.

METHODS

Single-center observational data extracted from a computerized dataset were used to identify all patients who underwent blood cultures from January 1, 2018 to May 15, 2021. Pathogen-specific incidence rates were compared according to the time of admission, patient's COVID status and ward type.

RESULTS

Among 14,884 patients for whom at least one blood culture was obtained, a total of 2534 were diagnosed with HA-BSI. Compared to both pre-pandemic and COVID-negative wards, HA-BSI due to S. aureus and Acinetobacter spp. (respectively 0.3 [95% CI 0.21-0.32] and 0.11 [0.08-0.16] new infections per 100 patient-days) showed significantly higher incidence rates, peaking in the COVID-ICU setting. Conversely, E. coli incident risk was 48% lower in COVID-positive vs COVID-negative settings (IRR 0.53 [0.34-0.77]). Among COVID + patients, 48% (n = 38/79) of S. aureus isolates were resistant to methicillin and 40% (n = 10/25) of K. pneumoniae isolates were resistant to carbapenems.

CONCLUSIONS

The data presented here indicate that the spectrum of pathogens causing BSI in ordinary wards and intensive care units varied during the pandemic, with the greatest shift experienced by COVID-ICUs. Antimicrobial resistance of selected high-priority bacteria was high in COVID positive settings.

Survey of healthcare worker perceptions of changes in infection control and antimicrobial stewardship practices in India and South Africa during the COVID-19 pandemic

Objective

To identify perceptions and awareness of changes in infection prevention and control (IPC) and antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) practices among healthcare workers (HCWs) during the COVID-19 pandemic in India and South Africa (SA).

Method

A self-administered online survey which included participant demographics, knowledge and sources of COVID-19 infection, perceived risks and barriers, and self-efficacy. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics.

Results

The study received 321 responses (response rate: 89.2%); 131/321 (40.8%) from India and 190/321 (59.2%) from SA; male to female response rate was 3:2, with majority of respondents aged 40-49 (89/321, 27.7%) and 30-39 (87/321, 27.1%) years. Doctors comprised 47.9% (57/119) of respondents in India and 74.6% (135/181) in SA. Majority of respondents in India (93/119, 78.2%) and SA (132/181, 72.9%) were from the private and public sectors, respectively, with more respondents in SA (123/174, 70.7%) than in India (38/104, 36.5%) involved in antimicrobial prescribing.Respondents reported increased IPC practices since the pandemic and noted a need for more training on case management, antibiotic and personal protective equipment (PPE) use. While they noted increased antibiotic prescribing since the pandemic, they did not generally associate their practice with such an increase. A willingness to be vaccinated, when vaccination becomes available, was expressed by 203/258 (78.7%) respondents.

Conclusions

HCWs reported improved IPC practices and changes in antibiotic prescribing during the COVID-19 pandemic. Targeted education on correct use of PPE was an identified gap. Although HCWs expressed concerns about antimicrobial resistance, their self-perceived antibiotic prescribing practices seemed unchanged. Additional studies in other settings could explore how our findings fit other contexts.

Efficacy and safety of antimicrobial stewardship prospective audit and feedback in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 (COVASP): a pragmatic, cluster-randomised, non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with increased antimicrobial use despite low rates of bacterial co-infection. Prospective audit and feedback is recommended to optimise antibiotic prescribing, but high-quality evidence supporting its use for COVID-19 is absent. We aimed to study the efficacy and safety of prospective audit and feedback in patients admitted to hospital for the treatment of COVID-19.

METHODS

COVASP was a prospective, pragmatic, non-inferiority, small-unit, cluster-randomised trial comparing prospective audit and feedback plus standard of care with standard of care alone in adults admitted to three hospitals in Edmonton, AB, Canada, with COVID-19 pneumonia. All patients aged at least 18 years who were admitted from the community to a designated study bed with microbiologically confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in the preceding 14 days were included if they had an oxygen saturation of 94% or lower on room air, required supplemental oxygen, or had chest-imaging findings compatible with COVID-19 pneumonia. Patients were excluded if they were transferred in from another acute care centre, enrolled in another clinical trial that involved antibiotic therapy, expected to progress to palliative care or death within 48 h of hospital admission, or managed by any member of the research team within 30 days of enrolment. COVID-19 unit and critical care unit beds were stratified and randomly assigned (1:1) to the prospective audit and feedback plus standard of care group or the standard of care group. Patients were masked to their bed assignment but the attending physician and study team were not. The primary outcome was clinical status on postadmission day 15, measured using a seven-point ordinal scale. We used a non-inferiority margin of 0·5. Analysis was by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04896866, and is now closed.

FINDINGS

Between March 1 and Oct 29, 2021, 1411 patients were screened and 886 were enrolled: 457 into the prospective audit and feedback plus standard of care group, of whom 429 completed the study, and 429 into the standard of care group, of whom 404 completed the study. Baseline characteristics were similar for both groups, with an overall mean age of 56·7 years (SD 17·3) and a median baseline ordinal scale of 4·0 (IQR 4·0-5·0). 301 audit and feedback events were recorded in the intervention group and 215 recommendations were made, of which 181 (84%) were accepted. Despite lower antibiotic use in the intervention group than in the control group (length of therapy 364·9 vs 384·2 days per 1000 patient days), clinical status at postadmission day 15 was non-inferior (median ordinal score 2·0 [IQR 2·0-3·0] vs 2·0 [IQR 2·0-4·0]; p=0·37, Mann-Whitney U test). Neutropenia was uncommon in both the intervention group (13 [3%] of 420 patients) and the control group (20 [5%] of 396 patients), and acute kidney injury occurred at a similar rate in both groups (74 [18%] of 421 patients in the intervention group and 76 [19%] of 399 patients in the control group). No intervention-related deaths were recorded.

INTERPRETATION

This cluster-randomised clinical trial shows that prospective audit and feedback is safe and effective in optimising and reducing antibiotic use in adults admitted to hospital with COVID-19. Despite many competing priorities during the COVID-19 pandemic, antimicrobial stewardship should remain a priority to mitigate the overuse of antibiotics in this population.

FUNDING

None.

Antibiotics Used for COVID-19 In-Patients from an Infectious Disease Ward

Background: although the prevalence of bacterial co-infections for COVID-19 patients is very low, most patients receive empirical antimicrobial therapy. Furthermore, broad spectrum antibiotics are preferred to narrow spectrum antibiotics. Methods: in order to estimate the excess of antibiotic prescriptions for patients with COVID-19, and to identify the factors that were correlated with the unjustified antibiotic usage, we conducted an observational (cohort) prospective study in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 at the National Institute for Infectious Diseases “Prof. Dr. Matei Bals”, Bucharest, on an infectious disease ward, from November 2021 to January 2022. To evaluate the prevalence of bacterial co-infection in these patients, all positive microbiology results and concomitant suspected or confirmed bacterial co-infections, as documented by the treating doctor, were recorded. The patients were grouped in two categories: patients who received antibiotics and those who did not receive antibiotics, justified or not. Results: from the 205 patients enrolled in the study, 83 (40.4%) received antibiotics prior to being admitted to the hospital. 84 patients (41.0%) received antibiotics during their hospitalization; however, only 32 patients (15.6%) had signs and symptoms suggestive of an infection, 19 (9.3%) presented pulmonary consolidation on the computed tomography (CT) scan, 20 (9.7%) patients had leukocytosis, 29 (14.1%) had an increased procalcitonin level and only 22 (10.7%) patients had positive microbiological tests. It was observed that patients treated with antibiotics were older [70 (54−76) vs. 65 (52.5−71.5), p = 0.023, r = 0.159], had a higher Charlson index [4 (2−5) vs. 2 (1−4), p = 0.007, r = 0.189], had a severe/critical COVID-19 disease more frequently [61 (72.6%) vs. 38 (31.4%), p < 0.001, df = 3, X2 = 39.563] and required more oxygen [3 (0−6) vs. 0 (0−2), p < 0.001, r = 0.328]. Conclusion: empirical antibiotic treatment recommendation should be reserved for COVID-19 patients that also had other clinical or paraclinical changes, which suggest a bacterial infection. Further research is needed to better identify patients with bacterial co-infection that should receive antibiotic treatment.

A population pharmacokinetic model of remdesivir and its major metabolites based on published mean values from healthy subjects

Remdesivir is a direct-acting anti-viral agent. It was originally evaluated against filoviruses. However, during the COVID-19 pandemic, it was investigated due to its anti-viral activities against (SARS-CoV-2) virus. Therefore remdesivir received conditional approval for treatment of patients with severe coronavirus disease. Yet, its pharmacokinetic properties are inadequately understood. This report describes the population pharmacokinetics of remdesivir and its two plasma-detectable metabolites (GS-704277 and GS-441524) in healthy volunteers. The data was extracted from published phase I single escalating and multiple i.v remdesivir dose studies conducted by the manufacturer. The model was developed by standard methods using non-linear mixed effect modeling. Also, a series of simulations were carried out to test suggested clinical doses. The model describes the distribution of remdesivir and each of its metabolites by respective two compartments with sequential metabolism between moieties, and elimination from central compartments. As individual data were not available, only inter-cohort variability could be assessed. The estimated point estimates for central (and peripheral) volumes of distribution for remdesivir, GS-704277, and GS-441524 were 4.89 L (46.5 L), 96.4 L (8.64 L), and 26.2 L (66.2 L), respectively. The estimated elimination clearances of remdesivir, GS704277, and GS-441524 reached 18.1 L/h, 36.9 L/h, and 4.74 L/h, respectively. The developed model described the data well. Simulations of clinically approved doses showed that GS-441524 concentrations in plasma exceeded the reported EC₅₀ values during the complete duration of treatment. Nonetheless, further studies are needed to explore the pharmacokinetics of remdesivir and its relationship to clinical efficacy, and the present model may serve as a useful starting point for additional evaluations.

Point Prevalence Survey of Antimicrobial Use during the COVID-19 Pandemic among Different Hospitals in Pakistan: Findings and Implications

The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly influenced antimicrobial use in hospitals, raising concerns regarding increased antimicrobial resistance (AMR) through their overuse. The objective of this study was to assess patterns of antimicrobial prescribing during the current COVID-19 pandemic among hospitals in Pakistan, including the prevalence of COVID-19. A point prevalence survey (PPS) was performed among 11 different hospitals from November 2020 to January 2021. The study included all hospitalized patients receiving an antibiotic on the day of the PPS. The Global-PPS web-based application was used for data entry and analysis. Out of 1024 hospitalized patients, 662 (64.64%) received antimicrobials. The top three most common indications for antimicrobial use were pneumonia (13.3%), central nervous system infections (10.4%) and gastrointestinal indications (10.4%). Ceftriaxone (26.6%), metronidazole (9.7%) and vancomycin (7.9%) were the top three most commonly prescribed antimicrobials among surveyed patients, with the majority of antibiotics administered empirically (97.9%). Most antimicrobials for surgical prophylaxis were given for more than one day, which is a concern. Overall, a high percentage of antimicrobial use, including broad-spectrums, was seen among the different hospitals in Pakistan during the current COVID-19 pandemic. Multifaceted interventions are needed to enhance rational antimicrobial prescribing including limiting their prescribing post-operatively for surgical prophylaxis.

Meeting the Challenges of Sepsis in Severe Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Call to Arms

Sepsis is a life-threatening organ dysfunction that is caused by a dysregulated host response to infection. Sepsis may be caused by bacterial, fungal, or viral pathogens. The clinical manifestations exhibited by patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related sepsis overlap with those exhibited by patients with sepsis from secondary bacterial or fungal infections and can include an altered mental status, dyspnea, reduced urine output, tachycardia, and hypotension. Critically ill patients hospitalized with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infections have increased risk for secondary bacterial and fungal infections. The same risk factors that may predispose to sepsis and poor outcome from bloodstream infections (BSIs) converge in patients with severe COVID-19. Current diagnostic standards for distinguishing between (1) patients who are critically ill, septic, and have COVID-19 and (2) patients with sepsis from other causes leave healthcare providers with 2 suboptimal choices. The first choice is to empirically administer broad-spectrum, antimicrobial therapy for what may or may not be sepsis. Such treatment may not only be ineffective and inappropriate, but it also has the potential to cause harm. The development of better methods to identify and characterize antimicrobial susceptibility will guide more accurate therapeutic interventions and reduce the evolution of new antibiotic-resistant strains. The ideal diagnostic test should (1) be rapid and reliable, (2) have a lower limit of detection than blood culture, and (3) be able to detect a specific organism and drug sensitivity directly from a clinical specimen. Rapid direct detection of antimicrobial-resistant pathogens would allow targeted therapy and result in improved outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19 and sepsis.

Real-world Evidence of the Effects of Novel Treatments for COVID-19 on Mortality: A Nationwide Comparative Cohort Study of Hospitalized Patients in the First, Second, Third, and Fourth Waves in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND

Large clinical trials on drugs for hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients have shown significant effects on mortality. There may be a discrepancy with the observed real-world effect. We describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes of hospitalized COVID-19 patients in the Netherlands during 4 pandemic waves and analyze the association of the newly introduced treatments with mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and discharge alive.

METHODS

We conducted a nationwide retrospective analysis of hospitalized COVID-19 patients between February 27, 2020, and December 31, 2021. Patients were categorized into waves and into treatment groups (hydroxychloroquine, remdesivir, neutralizing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 monoclonal antibodies, corticosteroids, and interleukin [IL]-6 antagonists). Four types of Cox regression analyses were used: unadjusted, adjusted, propensity matched, and propensity weighted.

RESULTS

Among 5643 patients from 11 hospitals, we observed a changing epidemiology during 4 pandemic waves, with a decrease in median age (67-64 years; P < .001), in in-hospital mortality on the ward (21%-15%; P < .001), and a trend in the ICU (24%-16%; P = .148). In ward patients, hydroxychloroquine was associated with increased mortality (1.54; 95% CI, 1.22-1.96), and remdesivir was associated with a higher rate of discharge alive within 29 days (1.16; 95% CI, 1.03-1.31). Corticosteroids were associated with a decrease in mortality (0.82; 95% CI, 0.69-0.96); the results of IL-6 antagonists were inconclusive. In patients directly admitted to the ICU, hydroxychloroquine, corticosteroids, and IL-6 antagonists were not associated with decreased mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Both remdesivir and corticosteroids were associated with better outcomes in ward patients with COVID-19. Continuous evaluation of real-world treatment effects is needed.

Gut microbiome dysbiosis in antibiotic-treated COVID-19 patients is associated with microbial translocation and bacteremia

Although microbial populations in the gut microbiome are associated with COVID-19 severity, a causal impact on patient health has not been established. Here we provide evidence that gut microbiome dysbiosis is associated with translocation of bacteria into the blood during COVID-19, causing life-threatening secondary infections. We first demonstrate SARS-CoV-2 infection induces gut microbiome dysbiosis in mice, which correlated with alterations to Paneth cells and goblet cells, and markers of barrier permeability. Samples collected from 96 COVID-19 patients at two different clinical sites also revealed substantial gut microbiome dysbiosis, including blooms of opportunistic pathogenic bacterial genera known to include antimicrobial-resistant species. Analysis of blood culture results testing for secondary microbial bloodstream infections with paired microbiome data indicates that bacteria may translocate from the gut into the systemic circulation of COVID-19 patients. These results are consistent with a direct role for gut microbiome dysbiosis in enabling dangerous secondary infections during COVID-19.

Prognostic factors of 30-day mortality in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia under standard remdesivir and dexamethasone treatment

Although some studies have reported prognostic factors for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), they were conducted before standard treatment with remdesivir and dexamethasone was implemented. This retrospective, observational study was conducted to evaluate various prognostic factors in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia receiving standard treatment with remdesivir and dexamethasone. Of 99 patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, 68 (68.7%) died within 30 days of hospitalization. The mean age was 71.3 years. Remdesivir and dexamethasone were administered to 80 (80.8%) and 84 (84.8%) patients, respectively. Early antibiotic treatment was administered to 70 patients (70.7%) within 5 days of hospitalization. Dexamethasone (79.4% vs 96.8%, P = .033) was more frequently administered in the survived group, whereas early antibiotics (60.3% vs 93.5%, P = .001) were less frequently administered. In the multivariate analysis, a high National Early Warning Score (NEWS; odds ratio [OR] 1.272), high Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI; OR 1.441), and dyspnea (OR 4.033) were independent risk factors for 30-day mortality. There was no significant difference in age, sex, and vaccination doses between the survived and fatal groups. Lymphopenia, monocytopenia and high levels of C-reactive protein (CRP)/lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) reflected poor prognosis. NEWS, CCI, and dyspnea were predictors of 30-day mortality in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Early antibiotic use did not lower the 30-day mortality risk.

Host and microbiome features of secondary infections in lethal covid-19

Secondary infections contribute significantly to covid-19 mortality but driving factors remain poorly understood. Autopsies of 20 covid-19 cases and 14 controls from the first pandemic wave complemented with microbial cultivation and RNA-seq from lung tissues enabled description of major organ pathologies and specification of secondary infections. Lethal covid-19 segregated into two main death causes with either dominant diffuse alveolar damage (DAD) or secondary pneumonias. The lung microbiome in covid-19 showed a reduced biodiversity and increased prototypical bacterial and fungal pathogens in cases of secondary pneumonias. RNA-seq distinctly mirrored death causes and stratified DAD cases into subgroups with differing cellular compositions identifying myeloid cells, macrophages and complement C1q as strong separating factors suggesting a pathophysiological link. Together with a prominent induction of inhibitory immune-checkpoints our study highlights profound alterations of the lung immunity in covid-19 wherein a reduced antimicrobial defense likely drives development of secondary infections on top of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

•

Covid-19 autopsy cohort complemented with microbial cultivation and deep sequencing

•

Major death causes stratify into DAD and secondary pneumonias

•

Prototypical bacterial and fungal agents are found in secondary pneumonias

•

Macrophages and C1q stratify DAD subgroups and indicate immune impairment in lungs

Incidence and Impact of Ventilator Associated Multidrug Resistant Pneumonia in Patients with SARS-COV2

Introduction

Ventilator Associated Pneumonia (VAP) is associated with significant cost, morbidity, and mortality. There is limited data on the incidence of VAP, appropriate antibiotic timing, and the impact of multidrug resistant VAP in intubated Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) patients.

Methods

A retrospective study was conducted at 2 tertiary urban academic centers involving 132 COVID-19 patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). The epidemiology of VAP, the impact of prior empiric antibiotic administration on the development of Multidrug Resistant Organism (MDRO) infections, and the impact of VAP on patient outcomes were studied.

Results

The average age of the patients was 60.58% were males, 70% were African-Americans and two-thirds of patients had diabetes, hypertension, or heart disease. The average Body Mass Index (BMI) was 32.9. Forty-one patients (27%) developed VAP. Patients with VAP had a significantly higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score prior to Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission. Sixty percent received empiric antibiotics before initiation of IMV, mostly on hospital admission, and 81% received empiric antibiotics at the time of intubation. The administration of empiric antibiotics was not associated with a higher prevalence of VAP. The prevalence of VAP was 22 per 1000 days on ventilation. No difference in mortality was seen between VAP and non-VAP groups at 49% and 57% respectively (p = 0.4). VAP was associated with increased ICU length of stay (LOS), 30 vs. 16 days (p < 0.001), and longer hospital LOS 35 vs. 17 days (p < 0.001). 40% of VAPs were caused by MDROs. The most common organism was Staphylococcus aureus (28%), with almost half (48%) being methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA).

Conclusion

VAP was a common complication of patients intubated for COVID-19 pneumonia. Most patients received empiric antibiotics upon the hospital and/or ICU admission. There was a 40% incidence of multidrug resistant pneumonia. Patients who developed VAP had almost twice as long hospital and ICU LOS.

Factors Affecting the Self-Isolation Monitoring Program for COVID-19 Patients at the Universitas Indonesia Hospital

When the outbreak of the COVID-19 delta variant occurred in June 2021, there was a marked increase in Indonesia's number of self-isolated patients. The Universitas Indonesia Hospital provided a One-Stop Service (OSS) to monitor COVID-19 patients on self-isolation. This study was conducted to determine the effectiveness of the self-isolation monitoring performed by hospitals and the factors that determined the outcomes of patients on self-isolation. This study was conducted using a cross-sectional method based on secondary data from electronic medical records. Data analysis was performed by determining the relationship of patient risk factors and characteristics with COVID-19 outcomes. The study found that poorer symptoms, administration of antibiotics, absence of shortness of breath, and normal ALT levels significantly improved the outcome of OSS patients. The study also suggested that during monitoring of patients on COVID-19 self-isolation, chest/thorax radiography is necessary. The self-isolation monitoring program is essential to observe the patient's condition and evaluate the possibility of deteriorating conditions that could lead to admission decisions in the early or middle stages of the program. This will be beneficial during pandemic emergencies.

Breakthrough COVID-19 Infection During the Delta Variant Dominant Period: Individualized Care Based on Vaccination Status Is Needed

BACKGROUND

The clinical features of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients in the COVID-19 vaccination era need to be clarified because breakthrough infection after vaccination is not uncommon.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed hospitalized COVID-19 patients during a delta variant-dominant period 6 months after the national COVID-19 vaccination rollout. The clinical characteristics and risk factors for severe progression were assessed and subclassified according to vaccination status.

RESULTS

A total of 438 COVID-19 patients were included; the numbers of patients in the unvaccinated, partially vaccinated and fully vaccinated groups were 188 (42.9%), 117 (26.7%) and 133 (30.4%), respectively. The vaccinated group was older, less symptomatic and had a higher Charlson comorbidity index at presentation. The proportions of patients who experienced severe progression in the unvaccinated and fully vaccinated groups were 20.3% (31/153) and 10.8% (13/120), respectively. Older age, diabetes mellitus, solid cancer, elevated levels of lactate dehydrogenase and chest X-ray abnormalities were associated with severe progression, and the vaccination at least once was the only protective factor for severe progression. Chest X-ray abnormalities at presentation were the only predictor for severe progression among fully vaccinated patients.

CONCLUSION

In the hospitalized setting, vaccinated and unvaccinated COVID-19 patients showed different clinical features and risk of oxygen demand despite a relatively high proportion of patients in the two groups. Vaccination needs to be assessed as an initial checkpoint, and chest X-ray may be helpful for predicting severe progression in vaccinated patients.

Microbiota and COVID-19: Long-term and complex influencing factors

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an infectious disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). According to the World Health Organization statistics, more than 500 million individuals have been infected and more than 6 million deaths have resulted worldwide. Although COVID-19 mainly affects the respiratory system, considerable evidence shows that the digestive, cardiovascular, nervous, and reproductive systems can all be involved. Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (AEC2), the target of SARS-CoV-2 invasion of the host is mainly distributed in the respiratory and gastrointestinal tract. Studies found that microbiota contributes to the onset and progression of many diseases, including COVID-19. Here, we firstly conclude the characterization of respiratory, gut, and oral microbial dysbiosis, including bacteria, fungi, and viruses. Then we explore the potential mechanisms of microbial involvement in COVID-19. Microbial dysbiosis could influence COVID-19 by complex interactions with SARS-CoV-2 and host immunity. Moreover, microbiota may have an impact on COVID-19 through their metabolites or modulation of ACE2 expression. Subsequently, we generalize the potential of microbiota as diagnostic markers for COVID-19 patients and its possible association with post-acute COVID-19 syndrome (PACS) and relapse after recovery. Finally, we proposed directed microbiota-targeted treatments from the perspective of gut microecology such as probiotics and prebiotics, fecal transplantation and antibiotics, and other interventions such as traditional Chinese medicine, COVID-19 vaccines, and ACE2-based treatments.

Procalcitonin as a Predictive Factor for the Clinical Outcome of Patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019

Purpose: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues. It has been reported that patients with bacterial coinfection have a higher mortality rate than patients without coinfection. However, there are no clear standard guidelines for the use of antibacterial drugs. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine the usefulness of procalcitonin, a specific indicator of bacterial infection, as a biomarker for predicting death in COVID-19 patients.Methods: This was a retrospective study of confirmed COVID-19 patients (<i>N</i> = 283) between December 2020 and February 2021 who survived or died. Logistic regression analysis was performed to determine whether there was an association between the level of procalcitonin and death. In addition, receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was performed to determine the usefulness of procalcitonin as a predictor of death.Results: In the non-survivor group, age, the number of patients transferred from a health care center, segment neutrophil ratio, C reactive protein, ferritin, and procalcitonin were significantly higher in the survivor group. In multivariate analysis, procalcitonin was identified as an independent factor associated with death (hazard ratio 6.162, confidential interval 2.285-26.322, <i>p</i> = 0.014). In addition, the predictive power of procalcitonin level and mortality was statistically significant using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis which gave an area under the curve value of 0.823, a cut-off value of 0.05, a sensitivity of 72.2%, a specificity of 87.5% (<i>p</i> < 0.001).Conclusion: Measurement of procalcitonin and other biomarkers may be useful to determine whether to use or discontinue use of antibacterial drugs in patients with COVID-19.

Organic-free growth of gold nanosheets inside 3D bacterial cellulose as highly efficient and robust antibacterial biopolymers

Without any chemical agent, gold nanosheets (AuNSs) were controllable synthesized through a facile photo-induced reduction within bacterial cellulose (BC) biopolymers. Compared with traditional polymers, AuNSs modified BC biopolymers (AuNSs@BC) biopolymers exhibited similar levels of softness, ductility, and better tensile strength. The in situ constructing of AuNSs@BC biopolymers was demonstrated to provide great reusability and antibacterial activities and towards both of Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus) and Escherichia coli (E. coli). The optimized AuNSs@BC biopolymers remain at least 95% antibacterial activities after three cycles. The facile and shape-controlled synthesis of AuNSs@BC biopolymers is believed to be useful for the design and application of biomass-based medical dressing.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10853-022-07273-x.

Clinical Impact of Empirical Antibiotic Therapy in Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019 Requiring Oxygen Therapy

Despite the low prevalence of secondary bacterial infection in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, most of them were administered antibiotic therapy empirically. However, the prognostic impact of empirical antibiotic therapy has not been evaluated. We conducted retrospective propensity score-matched case-control study of 233 COVID-19 patients with moderate to severe illnesses who required oxygen therapy and evaluated whether empirical antibiotic therapy could improve clinical outcomes. Empirical antibiotic therapy did not improve clinical outcomes including length of stay, days with oxygen requirement, the proportion of patients with increased oxygen demand, the proportion of patients who required mechanical ventilation, and overall mortality. This finding implies that routine administration of antibiotics for the treatment of COVID-19 is not essential and should be restricted.

Oropharyngeal Candidiasis among Egyptian COVID-19 Patients: Clinical Characteristics, Species Identification, and Antifungal Susceptibility, with Disease Severity and Fungal Coinfection Prediction Models

The study aimed to investigate the causative species, antifungal susceptibility, and factors associated with oropharyngeal candidiasis (OPC) among Egyptian COVID-19 patients. This is an observational, case-controlled, single-center study that included three groups: COVID-19 patients (30), COVID-19 patients with OPC (39), and healthy individuals (31). Patients’ demographic data (age, sex), laboratory tests, comorbidities, treatment, and outcomes were included. Candida species were isolated from COVID-OPC patient’s oropharyngeal swabs by convenient microbiological methods. Isolated strains were tested for antimicrobial susceptibility, biofilm production, aspartyl protease, and phospholipase activities. The most common respiratory symptoms reported were dyspnea (36/39; 92.4%) and cough (33/39; 84.7%). Candida albicans was the most common isolated species, accounting for 74.36% (29/39), followed by Candida tropicalis and Candida glabrata (15.38% and 10.26%, respectively). Amphotericin was effective against all isolates, while fluconazole was effective against 61.5%. A total of 53.8% of the isolates were biofilm producers. The phospholipase activity of C. albicans was detected among 58.6% (17/29) of the isolates. Significant variables from this study were used to create two equations from a regression model that can predict the severity of disease course and liability to fungal infection, with a stativity of 87% and 91%, respectively. According to our findings, COVID-19 patients with moderate to severe infection under prolonged use of broad-spectrum antibiotics and corticosteroids should be considered a high-risk group for developing OPC, and prophylactic measures are recommended to be included in the treatment protocols. In addition, due to the increased rate of fluconazole resistance, other new antifungals should be considered.

Clinical Characteristics Associated with Bacterial Bloodstream Coinfection in COVID-19

INTRODUCTION

Inappropriate antibiotic use in COVID-19 is often due to treatment of presumed bacterial coinfection. Predictive factors to distinguish COVID-19 from COVID-19 with bacterial coinfection or bloodstream infection are limited.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 595 COVID-19 patients admitted between March 8, 2020, and April 4, 2020, to describe factors associated with a bacterial bloodstream coinfection (BSI). The primary outcome was any characteristic associated with BSI in COVID-19, with secondary outcomes including 30-day mortality and days of antibiotic therapy (DOT) by antibiotic consumption (DOT/1000 patient-days). Variables of interest were compared between true BSI (n = 25) and all other COVID-19 cases (n = 570). A secondary comparison was performed between positive blood cultures with true BSI (n = 25) and contaminants (n = 33) on antibiotic use.

RESULTS

Fever (> 38 °C) (as a COVID-19 symptom) was not different between true BSI (n = 25) and all other COVID-19 patients (n = 570) (p = 0.93), although it was different as a reason for emergency department (ED) admission (p = 0.01). Neurological symptoms (ED reason or COVID-19 symptom) were significantly higher in the true BSI group (p < 0.01, p < 0.01) and were independently associated with true BSI (ED reason: OR = 3.27, p < 0.01; COVID-19 symptom: OR = 2.69, p = 0.03) on multivariate logistic regression. High (15-19.9 × 109/L) white blood cell (WBC) count at admission was also higher in the true BSI group (p < 0.01) and was independently associated with true BSI (OR = 2.56, p = 0.06) though was not statistically significant. Thirty-day mortality was higher among true BSI (p < 0.01). Antibiotic consumption (DOT/1000 patient-days) between true BSI and contaminants was not different (p = 0.34). True bloodstream coinfection was 4.2% (25/595) over the 28-day period.

CONCLUSION

True BSI in COVID-19 was associated with neurological symptoms and nonsignificant higher WBC, and led to overall higher 30-day mortality and worse patient outcomes.

Bacterial and fungal co-infections among ICU COVID-19 hospitalized patients in a Palestinian hospital: a retrospective cross-sectional study

Background: Diagnosis of co-infections with multiple pathogens among hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients can be jointly challenging and essential for appropriate treatment, shortening hospital stays and preventing antimicrobial resistance. This study proposes to investigate the burden of bacterial and fungal co-infections outcomes on COVID-19 patients. It is a single center cross-sectional study of hospitalized COVID-19 patients at Beit-Jala hospital in Palestine.

Methods: The study included 321 hospitalized patients admitted to the ICU between June 2020 and March 2021 aged ≥20 years, with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 via reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction assay conducted on a nasopharyngeal swab. The patient's information was gathered using graded data forms from electronic medical reports.

Results: The diagnosis of bacterial and fungal infection was proved through the patient’s clinical presentation and positive blood or sputum culture results. All cases had received empirical antimicrobial therapy before the intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and different regimens during the ICU stay. The rate of bacterial co-infection was 51.1%, mainly from gram-negative isolates ( Enterobacter species and K.pneumoniae). The rate of fungal co-infection caused by A.fumigatus was 48.9%, and the mortality rate was 8.1%. However, it is unclear if it had been attributed to SARS-CoV-2 or coincidental.

Conclusions: Bacterial and fungal co-infection is common among COVID-19 patients at the ICU in Palestine, but it is not obvious if these cases are attributed to SARS-CoV-2 or coincidental, because little data is available to compare it with the rates of secondary infection in local ICU departments before the pandemic. Comprehensively, those conclusions present data supporting a conservative antibiotic administration for severely unwell COVID-19 infected patients. Our examination regarding the impacts of employing antifungals to manage COVID-19 patients can work as a successful reference for future COVID-19 therapy.

A Single-Cell Network-Based Drug Repositioning Strategy for Post-COVID-19 Pulmonary Fibrosis

Post-COVID-19 pulmonary fibrosis (PCPF) is a long-term complication that appears in some COVID-19 survivors. However, there are currently limited options for treating PCPF patients. To address this problem, we investigated COVID-19 patients’ transcriptome at single-cell resolution and combined biological network analyses to repurpose the drugs treating PCPF. We revealed a novel gene signature of PCPF. The signature is functionally associated with the viral infection and lung fibrosis. Further, the signature has good performance in diagnosing and assessing pulmonary fibrosis. Next, we applied a network-based drug repurposing method to explore novel treatments for PCPF. By quantifying the proximity between the drug targets and the signature in the interactome, we identified several potential candidates and provided a drug list ranked by their proximity. Taken together, we revealed a novel gene expression signature as a theragnostic biomarker for PCPF by integrating different computational approaches. Moreover, we showed that network-based proximity could be used as a framework to repurpose drugs for PCPF.

Clinical update on COVID-19 for the emergency and critical care clinician: Medical management

INTRODUCTION

Coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) has resulted in millions of cases worldwide. As the pandemic has progressed, the understanding of this disease has evolved.

OBJECTIVE

This is the second part in a series on COVID-19 updates providing a focused overview of the medical management of COVID-19 for emergency and critical care clinicians.

DISCUSSION

COVID-19, caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has resulted in significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. A variety of medical therapies have been introduced for use, including steroids, antivirals, interleukin-6 antagonists, monoclonal antibodies, and kinase inhibitors. These agents have each demonstrated utility in certain patient subsets. Prophylactic anticoagulation in admitted patients demonstrates improved outcomes. Further randomized data concerning aspirin in outpatients with COVID-19 are needed. Any beneficial impact of other therapies, such as colchicine, convalescent plasma, famotidine, ivermectin, and vitamins and minerals is not present in reliable medical literature. In addition, chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are not recommended.

CONCLUSION

This review provides a focused update of the medical management of COVID-19 for emergency and critical care clinicians to help improve care for these patients.

Bacterial and fungal co-infection is a major barrier in COVID-19 patients: A specific management and therapeutic strategy is required

Microbial co-infections are another primary concern in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), yet it is an untouched area among researchers. Preliminary data and systematic reviews only show the type of pathogens responsible for that, but its pathophysiology is still unknown. Studies show that these microbial co-infections are hospital-acquired/nosocomial infections, and patients admitted to intensive care units with invasive mechanical ventilation are highly susceptible to it. Patients with COVID-19 had elevated inflammatory cytokines and a weakened cell-mediated immune response, with lower CD4⁺ T and CD8⁺ T cell counts, indicating vulnerability to various co-infections. Despite this, there are only a few studies that recommend the management of co-infections.

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis (November 2019-June 2021)

Background

Pneumonia from SARS-CoV-2 is difficult to distinguish from other viral and bacterial etiologies. Broad-spectrum antimicrobials are frequently prescribed to patients hospitalized with COVID-19 which potentially acts as a catalyst for the development of antimicrobial resistance (AMR).

Objectives

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis during the first 18 months of the pandemic to quantify the prevalence and types of resistant co-infecting organisms in patients with COVID-19 and explore differences across hospital and geographic settings.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science (BioSIS), and Scopus from November 1, 2019 to May 28, 2021 to identify relevant articles pertaining to resistant co-infections in patients with laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2. Patient- and study-level analyses were conducted. We calculated pooled prevalence estimates of co-infection with resistant bacterial or fungal organisms using random effects models. Stratified meta-analysis by hospital and geographic setting was also performed to elucidate any differences.

Results

Of 1331 articles identified, 38 met inclusion criteria. A total of 1959 unique isolates were identified with 29% (569) resistant organisms identified. Co-infection with resistant bacterial or fungal organisms ranged from 0.2 to 100% among included studies. Pooled prevalence of co-infection with resistant bacterial and fungal organisms was 24% (95% CI 8–40%; n = 25 studies: I² = 99%) and 0.3% (95% CI 0.1–0.6%; n = 8 studies: I² = 78%), respectively. Among multi-drug resistant organisms, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and multi-drug resistant Candida auris were most commonly reported. Stratified analyses found higher proportions of AMR outside of Europe and in ICU settings, though these results were not statistically significant. Patient-level analysis demonstrated > 50% (n = 58) mortality, whereby all but 6 patients were infected with a resistant organism.

Conclusions

During the first 18 months of the pandemic, AMR prevalence was high in COVID-19 patients and varied by hospital and geography although there was substantial heterogeneity. Given the variation in patient populations within these studies, clinical settings, practice patterns, and definitions of AMR, further research is warranted to quantify AMR in COVID-19 patients to improve surveillance programs, infection prevention and control practices and antimicrobial stewardship programs globally.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13756-022-01085-z.

Gut microbiome dysbiosis during COVID-19 is associated with increased risk for bacteremia and microbial translocation

The microbial populations in the gut microbiome have recently been associated with COVID-19 disease severity. However, a causal impact of the gut microbiome on COVID-19 patient health has not been established. Here we provide evidence that gut microbiome dysbiosis is associated with translocation of bacteria into the blood during COVID-19, causing life-threatening secondary infections. Antibiotics and other treatments during COVID-19 can potentially confound microbiome associations. We therefore first demonstrate in a mouse model that SARS-CoV-2 infection can induce gut microbiome dysbiosis, which correlated with alterations to Paneth cells and goblet cells, and markers of barrier permeability. Comparison with stool samples collected from 96 COVID-19 patients at two different clinical sites also revealed substantial gut microbiome dysbiosis, paralleling our observations in the animal model. Specifically, we observed blooms of opportunistic pathogenic bacterial genera known to include antimicrobial-resistant species in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Analysis of blood culture results testing for secondary microbial bloodstream infections with paired microbiome data obtained from these patients indicates that bacteria may translocate from the gut into the systemic circulation of COVID-19 patients. These results are consistent with a direct role for gut microbiome dysbiosis in enabling dangerous secondary infections during COVID-19.

Does the Fetus Limit Antibiotic Treatment in Pregnant Patients with COVID-19?

During pregnancy, there is a state of immune tolerance that predisposes them to viral infection, causing maternal-fetal vulnerability to the adverse effects of COVID-19. Bacterial coinfections significantly increase the mortality rate for COVID-19. However, it is known that all drugs, including antibiotics, will enter the fetal circulation in a variable degree despite the role of the placenta as a protective barrier and can cause teratogenesis or other malformations depending on the timing of exposure to the drug. Also, it is important to consider the impact of the indiscriminate use of antibiotics during pregnancy can alter both the maternal and fetal-neonatal microbiota, generating future repercussions in both. In the present study, the literature for treating bacterial coinfections in pregnant women with COVID-19 is reviewed. In turn, we present the findings in 50 pregnant women hospitalized diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 without previous treatment with antibiotics; moreover, a bacteriological culture of sample types was performed. Seven pregnant women had coinfection with Staphylococcus haemolyticus, Staphylococcus epidermidis, Streptococcus agalactiae, Escherichia coli ESBL +, biotype 1 and 2, Acinetobacter jahnsonii, Enterococcus faecium, and Clostridium difficile. When performing the antibiogram, resistance to multiple drugs was found, such as macrolides, aminoglycosides, sulfa, dihydrofolate reductase inhibitors, beta-lactams, etc. The purpose of this study was to generate more scientific evidence on the better use of antibiotics in these patients. Because of this, it is important to perform an antibiogram to prevent abuse of empirical antibiotic treatment with antibiotics in pregnant women diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2.

Community-Acquired Pneumonia in Canada During COVID-19

Dealing with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been a monumental test of medical skills and resources worldwide. The management of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) can at times be difficult, but treating CAP in the setting of COVID-19 can be particularly trying and confusing and raises a number of challenging questions relating to etiology, diagnosis, and treatment. This article is based on the authors’ experiences and presents an overview of how CAP during COVID-19 is handled in Canada. We touch on the issues of microbial etiology in patients with CAP in the setting of COVID-19 as well as diagnostic, site of care, and treatment approaches. Published guidelines are the basis of management of CAP and are discussed in the context of Canadian data. We also outline the usual treatment approaches to COVID-19, particularly in patients who have been hospitalized.

A COVID-19 first evaluation clinic at a university hospital in Turkey

BACKGROUND

We aimed to analyze the usefulness of such a reserved area for the admission of the patients' symptoms suggesting COVID-19 and compare the demographic and clinical characteristics of the patients with COVID-19 and without COVID-19 who were admitted to C1 during the first month of the COVID-19 outbreak in our hospital.

METHODS

A new area was set up in Hacettepe University Adult Hospital to limit the contact of COVID-19 suspicious patients with other patients, which was named as COVID-19 First Evaluation Outpatient Clinic (C1). C1 had eight isolation rooms and two sampling rooms for SARS-CoV-2 polymerase-chain-reaction (PCR). All rooms were negative-pressurized. Patients who had symptoms that were compatible with COVID-19 were referred to C1 from pretriage areas. All staff received training for the appropriate use of personal protective equipment and were visited daily by the Infection Prevention and Control team.

RESULTS

One hundred and ninety-eight (29.4%) of 673 patients who were admitted to C1were diagnosed with COVID-19 between March 20, 2020, and April 19, 2020. SARS-CoV-2 PCR was positive in 142 out of 673 patients. Chest computerized tomography (CT) was performed in 421 patients and COVID-19 was diagnosed in 56 of them based on CT findings despite negative PCR. Four hundred and ninety-three patients were tested for other viral and bacterial infections with multiplex real-time reverse-transcriptase PCR (RTPCR). Blood tests that included complete blood count, renal and liver functions, d-dimer levels, ferritin, C- reactive protein, and procalcitonin were performed in 593 patients. Only one out of 44 healthcare workers who worked at C1 was infected by SARS-CoV-2.

DISCUSSION

Early diagnosis of infected patients and ensuring adequate isolation are very important to control the spread of COVID-19. The purpose of setting up the COVID-19 first evaluation outpatient clinic was to prevent the overcrowding of ER due to mild or moderate infections, ensure appropriate distancing and isolation, and enable emergency services to serve for real emergencies. A wellplanned outpatient care area and teamwork including internal medicine, microbiology, and radiology specialists under the supervision of infectious diseases specialists allowed adequate management of the mild-to-moderate patients with suspicion of COVID-19.