A warning related to predicting the severity of COVID-19 pneumonia using the A-DROP scoring system

Comparison of pneumonia severity scores for COVID-19 patients with the Omicron variant

INTRODUCTION

We demonstrated that there was a significant relationship between the severity measured using the A-DROP scoring system and the mortality rate in patients with COVID-19 community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in the ancestral strain, Alpha variant, and Delta variant. We investigated the usefulness of the A-DROP scoring system in SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant CAP and compared it with severity scores, the Pneumonia Severity Index (PSI) and CURB-65 score.

METHODS

We analyzed a total of 547 patients with COVID-19 CAP Omicron variant; 198 cases were the BA.1 subvariant, 127 cases were the BA.2 subvariant, and 222 cases were the BA.5 subvariant, respectively.

RESULTS

The mortality rates in patients with COVID-19 CAP among the three Omicron subvariants were identical in each pneumonia severity group. The mortality rate in patients with the Omicron variant was 0 % in patients classified with mild disease, 0.6 % in those with moderate disease, 10.4 % in those with severe disease, and 34.8 % in those with extremely severe disease. The mortality rate in patients with COVID-19 CAP increased depending on the severity classified according to the A-DROP system in each of the Omicron subvariants (Cochran-Armitage trend test; p < 0.001). The values of the area under the curve in Receiver Operating Characteristic analysis for prediction of 30-day mortality was 0.881, 0.879, and 0.863 for A-DROP, PSI, and CURB-65, respectively. There were no significant differences in the predictive ability of each pneumonia severity score.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrated that the A-DROP scoring system is useful for predicting mortality in patients with COVID-19 CAP.

Validation of a specialized evaluation system for COVID-19 in Japan: A retrospective, multicenter cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Evaluation of a severity grade (SG) is important to classify patients for efficient use of limited medical resources. This study validates two existing evaluation systems for the prevention of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Japan: a criterion of SG and a list of 14 specialized underlying diseases (SUDs).

METHODS

A retrospective cohort was created using electronic medical records from 18 research institutes. The cohort includes 6,050 COVID-19 patients with two types of diagnosis information as follows: SG at hospitalization among mild, moderate I, moderate II, and severe and aggravation after hospitalization.

RESULTS

A crude mortality rate and an aggravation rate increased by the worsening of SG in the COVID-19 cohort. The transition of the aggravation rate was notable for COVID-19 patients with SUD. A conditional probability of the mortality given the aggravation in the COVID-19 cohort was 87.4% compared to mild or moderate patients (approximately 21%-45%) who have the possibility of the aggravation. An odds ratio of the mortality and aggravation information about the SUD list was higher than other variables.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrated the possibility of improving the criteria of SG by including the SUD list for more effective operation of the criteria of SG. Furthermore, we demonstrated the importance of the prevention of the aggravation based on the conditional probability, and the possibility of predicting the aggravation using the risk factors.

Comparison of Pneumonia Severity Indices, qCSI, 4C-Mortality Score and qSOFA in Predicting Mortality in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19 Pneumonia

This is a retrospective and observational study on 1511 patients with SARS-CoV-2, who were diagnosed with COVID-19 by real-time PCR testing and hospitalized due to COVID-19 pneumonia. 1511 patients, 879 male (58.17%) and 632 female (41.83%) with a mean age of 60.1 ± 14.7 were included in the study. Survivors and non-survivors groups were statistically compared with respect to survival, discharge, ICU admission and in-hospital death. Although gender was not statistically significant different between two groups, 80 (60.15%) of the patients who died were male. Mean age was 72.8 ± 11.8 in non-survivors vs. 59.9 ± 14.7 in survivors (p < 0.001). Overall in-hospital mortality was found to be 8.8% (133/1511 cases), and overall ICU admission was 10.85% (164/1511 cases). The PSI/PORT score of the non-survivors group was higher than that of the survivors group (144.38 ± 28.64 versus 67.17 ± 25.63, p < 0.001). The PSI/PORT yielding the highest performance was the best predictor for in-hospital mortality, since it incorporates the factors as advanced age and comorbidity (AUROC 0.971; % 95 CI 0.961−0.981). The use of A-DROP may also be preferred as an easier alternative to PSI/PORT, which is a time-consuming evaluation although it is more comprehensive.